Re: Last Call: draft-resnick-2822upd (Internet Message Format) to Draft Standard

Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> Sat, 05 April 2008 21:56 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: ietf-archive@megatron.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-ietf-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 22ABD3A6C82; Sat, 5 Apr 2008 14:56:52 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: ietf@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8884F3A6D29 for <ietf@core3.amsl.com>; Sat, 5 Apr 2008 14:56:50 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id YB7iXVcilRlg for <ietf@core3.amsl.com>; Sat, 5 Apr 2008 14:56:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from wr-out-0506.google.com (wr-out-0506.google.com [64.233.184.237]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 90C333A69A9 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sat, 5 Apr 2008 14:56:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by wr-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id 50so539928wra.13 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sat, 05 Apr 2008 14:56:58 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:organization:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=Z1xl5kJX1pjeyG70Z6mc4A4RbjRKVgZzNXkMazjS3oc=; b=R/wZlnwVl1zQe6F/rtotjK/R/2Ig6W6X0XaKPJn04nD8LA34l1NNzDYmRLpdZclZ3VPytGTCshiHSTbID/eayqZ/imiDOT/4/HziRO74fy65GNpAX2/73hE77u6BzWCCTwyvGifsZgFD5AlPxkrD2alYcEwEVIgAmYZJLAzuENo=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:organization:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=BtK7MR7K0fIDzFIVab9EX1Kp2LSjPW8DIasy+xHFYe3KuWJPg6Kstn3jT+1+3fni3aezuX9ZeOyZPOw0fRXs/akSMmutGXsBGfvHslJYh4TdZ9mamIXVEwKtGiz0YDojV6phtjUfdhNHiCZ87+z3jcAtBWf0wHwjKuZHkP5BSSU=
Received: by 10.115.18.18 with SMTP id v18mr1118163wai.210.1207432617837; Sat, 05 Apr 2008 14:56:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ?10.1.1.4? ( [219.89.217.125]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id m6sm11849764wag.11.2008.04.05.14.56.54 (version=SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Sat, 05 Apr 2008 14:56:57 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <47F7F5A3.9060905@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 06 Apr 2008 09:56:51 +1200
From: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
Organization: University of Auckland
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (Windows/20070728)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Frank Ellermann <hmdmhdfmhdjmzdtjmzdtzktdkztdjz@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Last Call: draft-resnick-2822upd (Internet Message Format) to Draft Standard
References: <20080403231146.5F0853A683E@core3.amsl.com> <47F57508.3040107@gmail.com><ft57m4$csu$1@ger.gmane.org> <8BB8410A1437A8973C333DCE@p3.JCK.COM> <47F6FAA3.3090009@gmail.com> <ft85nn$sga$1@ger.gmane.org>
In-Reply-To: <ft85nn$sga$1@ger.gmane.org>
Cc: ietf@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: ietf-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: ietf-bounces@ietf.org

Frank,

On 2008-04-06 03:29, Frank Ellermann wrote:
> Brian E Carpenter wrote:
> 
>> My underlying concern is that 2822upd should not appear
>> ridiculous to anyone who looks at a typical mail header
>> and sees the X-headers.
> 
> 2822upd specifies only about twenty mail header fields.
> The rest is either registered and specified elsewhere,
> or to some degree "unknown" (unregistered, unspecified,
> proprietary, private use, experimental, spam, and so on).

Sure. But X- is described *nowhere* in current documents;
the one example in provisional registration is marked as
"deprecated" on no basis whatever (there is nothing in
2822 or 2822upd or 3864 to suggest a "deprecated"
registration), and...

> 
>> John's message reached me with X-Original-To,
> 
> A draft about Original-* didn't make it so far, ...

I don't care about the details of unregistered headers.
I simply want to see a statement of reality in 2822upd.
It can be simple or complicated but IMHO it needs to
say

 X- headers are in widespread use.
 They are not part of this standard.
 They must not be relied on to have any particular semantics
 or even to be delivered.

OK, I've said all I want to say on this.

     Brian
_______________________________________________
IETF mailing list
IETF@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf