IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: SMTP RFC: "MUST NOT" change or delete Received header

Ted Lemon <ted.lemon@nominum.com> Sat, 29 March 2014 12:37 UTC

Return-Path: <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B0B881A04C5 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 29 Mar 2014 05:37:06 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.91
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham
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 XRMDMldyW7dF for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 29 Mar 2014 05:37:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from shell-too.nominum.com (shell-too.nominum.com [64.89.228.229]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A8AFB1A04C2 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sat, 29 Mar 2014 05:37:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from archivist.nominum.com (archivist.nominum.com [64.89.228.108]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "*.nominum.com", Issuer "Go Daddy Secure Certification Authority" (verified OK)) by shell-too.nominum.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6C25E1B8360 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sat, 29 Mar 2014 05:37:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from webmail.nominum.com (cas-02.win.nominum.com [64.89.228.132]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "mail.nominum.com", Issuer "Go Daddy Secure Certification Authority" (verified OK)) by archivist.nominum.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 499C1190043; Sat, 29 Mar 2014 05:37:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.0.10.40] (192.168.1.10) by CAS-02.WIN.NOMINUM.COM (192.168.1.101) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.158.1; Sat, 29 Mar 2014 05:36:56 -0700
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.2 \(1874\))
Subject: Re: SMTP RFC: "MUST NOT" change or delete Received header
From: Ted Lemon <ted.lemon@nominum.com>
In-Reply-To: <5336979B.6000102@cisco.com>
Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2014 08:36:52 -0400
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-ID: <0AF4D5B8-C99C-4944-87FA-A458D6CE67D9@nominum.com>
References: <mailman.1570.1395964793.2468.ietf@ietf.org> <53366F34.8050501@ageispolis.net> <5336979B.6000102@cisco.com>
To: Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1874)
X-Originating-IP: [192.168.1.10]
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/dWvZdQbNT28JXm5uhpAv7JlCml0
Cc: "Kevin M. Gallagher" <kevin@ageispolis.net>, ietf@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/>
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>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2014 12:37:06 -0000

On Mar 29, 2014, at 5:51 AM, Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com> wrote:
> There is at least some value in retaining trace headers both for
> debugging and anti-spam (mostly validating what one would expect to for
> a given sender see), headers added by an MSA can entail privacy concerns
> that (IMHO) outweigh debugging considerations.

RFC 7044 (An Extension to the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) for Request History Information) did a pretty nice job of addressing very similar privacy concerns.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email