John Levine wrote:
In article <584815fc.40...@sorbs.net> you write:
David Hofstee wrote:
The X- type headers are deprecated... https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6648
Oh now there's a bad idea if ever I heard one...
If you read the document, you'd know that it said that if people actually
use an X- header it's too hard to change it, and there's not exactly a
shortage of ASCII strings one could use for header names, so if you need
to make up a name, just make one up and don't use X-.
Yeah, I read it... Still a bad idea...
Legitimate eXtension headers as X- are easily filtered as "this is
something you shouldn't pay attention to because it's not part of any
standard". Take away the X- and you go back to the 'ok what is
legitimate and what is not' situation... with a never ending list of
updates when people request (and are granted) legitimacy as standards...
I for one have a crap load of X- headers, originally I just wanted to
create my own, but when I really thought about it - I prepended 'X-' as
I realized it was actually a good idea.)
(not that anyone couldn't put random crap in anyhow - but it was more
that there was legitimate headers which was a finite list, and then
there was the X- headers which were open season... then anything else
was "whoooa! what have we here then?")
Regards,
Michelle
_______________________________________________
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop
