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

Hector Santos <> Tue, 21 July 2020 16:10 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8B6423A0B67 for <>; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 09:10:21 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.101
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.101 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.b=hOSF8K/o; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.b=Sg1O1QJ8
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4hVzPne3d7Lg for <>; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 09:10:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 184083A0B60 for <>; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 09:10:18 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1;; s=tms1; a=rsa-sha1; c=simple/relaxed; l=2909; t=1595347810;; atpsh=sha1; h=Received:Received:Received:Received:Message-ID:Date:From: Organization:To:Subject:List-ID; bh=Sci3re4ZWqD49phhZrJ8D44G55c=; b=hOSF8K/o5S1EsSfay7PYOpfolY/agvOUUMUiWbg+MAnc6zk8P5Y0NDwPg3tGlY O8DhLbiFsSf8IA1f+1UzA6y/gAfKruFMxIojJKvDUwEVC0IoHos33UHMLjKeFHZq ZcxVcfjroHNo4o9GPVB4F1qytgC0uHUXsuouix4VCozhE=
Received: by (Wildcat! SMTP Router v8.0.454.10) for; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 12:10:10 -0400
Authentication-Results:; dkim=pass header.s=tms1; dmarc=pass policy=reject (atps signer);
Received: from ([]) by (Wildcat! SMTP v8.0.454.10) with ESMTP id 1780109685.8424.7848; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 12:10:09 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1;; s=tms1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/relaxed; l=2909; t=1595347708; h=Received:Received: Message-ID:Date:From:Organization:To:Subject:List-ID; bh=zHK28tG /VGPFw9nSfALkwjVR4oO67AensahjeXAFEHk=; b=Sg1O1QJ80zYLAfPrKV47xKk 5On+YJiIDCXa9jveYTGudQ4MOBFQXprVLjaKTwGulwvIV5Uy551IRYYLFVxz8oQJ Xd/HwrRnb+wcThrmcKUH4ZYh/TPb6qLm+yOQ34PHSDS/khHaxQy6m1sRbv6qt/qN oKFQGEIXrGg0+XRqfreY=
Received: by (Wildcat! SMTP Router v8.0.454.10) for; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 12:08:28 -0400
Received: from [] ([]) by (Wildcat! SMTP v8.0.454.10) with ESMTP id 1490883781.1.26972; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 12:08:28 -0400
Message-ID: <>
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 2020 12:10:07 -0400
From: Hector Santos <>
Organization: Santronics Software, Inc.
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.8.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20200720182700.6A3541D44CA2@ary.qy>
In-Reply-To: <20200720182700.6A3541D44CA2@ary.qy>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [ietf-smtp] Curious, with this now being associated to emailcore, should list name change?
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Discussion of issues related to Simple Mail Transfer Protocol \(SMTP\) \[RFC 821, RFC 2821, RFC 5321\]" <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 21 Jul 2020 16:10:22 -0000

Microsoft and Windows does not have a copyright with "X-" junk headers.

Junk is generated from everywhere, including from the *nix weenies 
camp & especially from Google and the IETF creating protocols with 
useless overhead.  You, yourself, have added a new "X-" header with 
"X-Original-From" while making 5322.From useless to fix a mess you are 
partly responsible for where more DKIM signatures and related patch 
work headers are expected to be needed.  Let just wait for ARC per 
node wasted overhead to be widely spilled over into the email network. 
  I already have plans for it but not what you think:

Today, the majority of headers are useless information to the MDA. 
The most important are:


Just like it has always has been since the beginning of electronic 
communications time.

Networking headers like Reply-To: are needed too.  MIME headers will 
be needed for rendering.

For the record, our mail software, "older than dirt," has two modes, 
one to keep a raw "as is" import storage and one to import/convert 
into a proprietary format where unnecessary RFC5322 headers are 
pruned. Once mail is received by the MDA, validated, spam or 
otherwise, all the extra overhead is not needed.

Hector Santos,

On 7/20/2020 2:27 PM, John Levine wrote:
> In article <B7E061A14E80279E1E14D92F@PSB> you write:
>> It is interesting that every one of these starts in "X-".
>> Presumably, by putting "X-" in front of their field names, the
>> perpetrators believe that they are exempt, not only from the
>> registry and its rules, but any rules at all. ...
> No, they heard somewhere that you put x- in front of header names you
> make up and the only registry they know about is the one in MS
> Windows.
> I did a similar sweep through my mail archive and found 1388 different
> headers, all but 144 of which start with x-. Here's the longest ones,
> all of which thoughtfully tell who to blame:
> x-ms-exchange-crosstenant-originalattributedtenantconnectingip
> x-ms-exchange-crosstenant-rms-persistedconsumerorg
> x-ms-exchange-transport-crosstenantheadersstamped
> x-ms-exchange-transport-crosstenantheadersstripped
> x-white-heron-it-services-mailscanner-information
> x-white-heron-it-services-mailscanner-spamscore
> x-white-heron-it-services-mailscanner-watermark
> My experience with people from Microsoft is that they are plenty smart
> but often have no idea what they don't know. It might be productive to
> make a few queries and see if we can encourage them to register them a
> provisional names so at least there's less chance of collision.
> _______________________________________________
> ietf-smtp mailing list