Re: ehip and shutup lists

[Alexey Melnikov <[e-mail]>]

John/John,

On 26/11/2015 00:04, John C Klensin wrote:
> --On Wednesday, November 25, 2015 22:00 +0000 John Levine
> <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>> These two lists were just announced in the past couple of
>> days, and neither has any traffic yet other than the
>> announcements.
>>
>> They are about more or less the same thing, ehip about hiding
>> info in mail headers, shutup about not recording mail trace
>> information.
> I wasn't able to even figure that much out from the
> announcement.  I guessed that "SMTP headers" might mean
> SMTP-provided trace header fields, but I can come up with
> alternate theories and I got "hiding" not "not recording".  I
> did write the list managers about that, but have not yet gotten
> a reply.
The two mailing lists are about related, but not exactly the same work.

draft-josefsson-email-received-privacy

My understanding is that ehip is mostly to work on 
draft-wchuang-grunion-01 ("S/MIME Proxy Forwarding"). "shutup" is for 
charter discussions and hopefully for the subsequent WG related to 
personal information reduction in the Received header fields 
(draft-josefsson-email-received-privacy) and encryption of other 
sensitive header fields when using S/MIME/OpenPGP 
(https://modernpgp.org/memoryhole/).
>> I have my doubts about the wisdom of both, but it seems to me
>> that it would make sense to pick one list and close the other
>> down since it'll be the same people arguing about the same
>> issues on both.
> Agreed.  There is another reason as well.  If the intent is to
> hide trace and normal (nominally UA-UA) mail header fields in
> transit, it is almost certain that the same or closely-related
> mechanisms will need to be used, at least unless the plan is to
> replace Internet mail's "envelope and header" model with
> separate outer envelope, trace envelope, and header model
> (perhaps separating part of all of the latter from message
> content by more than a blank line) similar to the P1/P2/P3
> abstraction in X.400-series email.
I think this would be a perfect topic to discuss on the shutup@ mailing 
list. So please subscribe and let's discuss this topic there.
> If the shut-up intent is either to not record trace fields or to
> create and move to that more complex envelope structure, I, for
> one, would prefer to have that discussion on the SMTP list,
> where the right set of people are watching.
I think notifying people on the SMTP mailing list is a good idea, but I 
think the chartering discussion would be better done on a separate 
mailing list.

Best Regards,
Alexey