--On Wednesday, November 25, 2015 22:00 +0000 John Levine <johnl@xxxxxxxxx> 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. > 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. 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. best, john