[Mailman-Developers] New RFC on using DKIM with MLMs

[Joshua Cranmer]

On 10/25/2011 2:47 AM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
> Joshua Cranmer writes:
>   >  On 10/24/2011 8:04 PM, Barry Warsaw wrote:
>   >  >  On Oct 13, 2011, at 11:41 PM, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
>
>   >  >>  There's movement afoot to deprecate use of "X-" in header field
>   >  >>  names.  Just call it "Mailman-Topic".  And if it's worthwhile,
>   >  >>  consider registering it with IANA.
>   >  >
>   >  >  I wonder if we should remove the X- prefixes for Mailman 3.
>   >  >  Here's a list of ones we still add or recognize (some might be
>   >  >  used only in the test suite):
>
> I would say that anything that is used only in the test suite should
> still get an X-, although I suppose you could use Mailman-Test- too.
>
>   >  I believe the rule of thumb is you're supposed to use the X- prefix if
>   >  it's not registered, so until the header is registered at IANA, I would
>   >  vote that the X- prefix stays retained.
>
> What Murray is saying is that the rule of thumb is changing in
> response to experience.  What has happened is that the experience with
> promoting an X-Foo header to just Foo has been poor, and the attendant
> confusion often hinders adoption.  So many people have been in the
> habit of ignoring the X- namespace anyway (the most widespread example
> I know of is the adoption of Mail-Followup-To in mail, which has no[1]
> sanction in the RFCs, although it's a long-standard header in news).

There is a formal procedure in place for the creation of new headers 
(RFC 3864); if you're going to drop the X-, you might as well at least 
attempt to get them provisionally accepted...

-- 
Joshua Cranmer
News submodule owner
DXR coauthor