Re: [ietf-smtp] Curious, with this now being associated to emailcore, should list name change?

Pete Resnick <resnick@episteme.net> Tue, 21 July 2020 21:16 UTC

Return-Path: <resnick@episteme.net>
X-Original-To: ietf-smtp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf-smtp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EE1DB3A0A98 for <ietf-smtp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 14:16:59 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.897
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 07TYRw7nNSbK for <ietf-smtp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 14:16:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from episteme.net (episteme.net [216.169.5.102]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8DAE53A0A96 for <ietf-smtp@ietf.org>; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 14:16:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by episteme.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3218DB56E83F; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 16:16:54 -0500 (CDT)
Received: from episteme.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (episteme.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id M0p2_wDokKvh; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 16:16:51 -0500 (CDT)
Received: from [172.16.1.9] (episteme.net [216.169.5.102]) by episteme.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 65282B56E82D; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 16:16:51 -0500 (CDT)
From: "Pete Resnick" <resnick@episteme.net>
To: "Arnt Gulbrandsen" <arnt@gulbrandsen.priv.no>
Cc: ietf-smtp@ietf.org
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 2020 16:15:34 -0500
X-Mailer: MailMate (1.13.1r5697)
Message-ID: <49CA9C38-1A30-4456-869D-60D5B70C27B1@episteme.net>
In-Reply-To: <ce227a65-05f8-4b3a-b464-5720cd39fc3b@gulbrandsen.priv.no>
References: <81c2a19c-f19e-b495-3441-22c2a112037c@linuxmagic.com> <52D9A14B4CDD14BB4C97C355@PSB> <CAKFo7w=9_eZda47ZMUv_NE9iN1FEnGM7m3nUFy3_Wq4se+W8XQ@mail.gmail.com> <DE8B2C33275660E19FFA513C@PSB> <CAKFo7wmsm+1ck5G7Sj-NpnyXgeHd14cxGQ6K9KFeVG0_CTM1sw@mail.gmail.com> <5C6196E28FCDC4A312E73A00@PSB> <CAKFo7wk+jLGqjs6mU=Gv3G1xAg+O5OyTmt66fjW4DLzUT5kuPw@mail.gmail.com> <20200719144357.A64221D393E2@ary.qy> <ce227a65-05f8-4b3a-b464-5720cd39fc3b@gulbrandsen.priv.no>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; markup=markdown
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf-smtp/zD-d6whGawws2IdlwgQYHHfZRHU>
Subject: Re: [ietf-smtp] Curious, with this now being associated to emailcore, should list name change?
X-BeenThere: ietf-smtp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Discussion of issues related to Simple Mail Transfer Protocol \(SMTP\) \[RFC 821, RFC 2821, RFC 5321\]" <ietf-smtp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf-smtp>, <mailto:ietf-smtp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf-smtp/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf-smtp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-smtp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-smtp>, <mailto:ietf-smtp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 21 Jul 2020 21:17:00 -0000

On 19 Jul 2020, at 11:57, Arnt Gulbrandsen wrote:

> My personal server currently has 559 field names longer than that. The 
> 25 worst offenders:
>
> X-Offlineimap-X706593913-6d61646475636b2e6e6574-494e424f582e647261667473
> X-Gemstorm-Computing-T/A-The-It-Company-Mailscanner-Information
> X-Ms-Exchange-Crosstenant-Originalattributedtenantconnectingip
> X-Gemstorm-Computing-T/A-The-It-Company-Mailscanner-Spamcheck
> X-Ssjmail.Ssjfinance.Com-Mail-Server-Mailscanner-Information
> Staticcontent1_Header1_F731d3dc-Fd31-4161-Ad91-1083ba56853f
> Staticcontent2_Header2_F731d3dc-Fd31-4161-Ad91-1083ba56853f
> X-Mimedefang-Relay-15b21d6f94afe8e768c451e09085c007047aae7e
> X-Mimedefang-Relay-89167b66339720c294cd81d33948afd6488b114f
> X-Ssjmail.Ssjfinance.Com-Mail-Server-Mailscanner-Spamcheck
> X-Ssjmail.Ssjfinance.Com-Mail-Server-Mailscanner-Spamscore
> X-Gemstorm-Computing-T/A-The-It-Company-Mailscanner-From
> X-Mailscan-242.Hostingdynamo.Net-Mailscanner-Information
> X-Content-Pgp-Universal-Saved-Content-Transfer-Encoding
> X-Kypusserverappliance-Kypus-Mailprotection-Information
> X-Gemstorm-Computing-T/A-The-It-Company-Mailscanner-Id
> X-Mailscan-242.Hostingdynamo.Net-Mailscanner-Spamscore
> X-Mailer.Unfpa-Bangladesh.Org-Mailscanner-Information
> X-Nugget-Enterprises-Antispam-Mailscanner-Information
> X-Ssjmail.Ssjfinance.Com-Mail-Server-Mailscanner-From
> X-Bangladesh-Open-University-Mailscanner-Information
> X-Ironport.Danmargroup.Co.Za-Mailscanner-Information
> X-Mail01lehostingservicesnet-Mailscanner-Information
> X-First-Flight-Couriers-Ltd-Mailscanner-Information
> X-Gemstorm-Computing-T/A-The-It-Company-Mailscanner

Other than X- field names not doing what people think they're doing, I 
don't see the problem here. None of them are over 77 characters, and 
none (including the ones you showed later with curly braces in them) are 
using problematic characters. So what's the problem?

pr
-- 
Pete Resnick https://www.episteme.net/
All connections to the world are tenuous at best