Path: utzoo!lsuc!ncrcan!ontenv!soley
From: soley@ontenv.UUCP (Norman S. Soley)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.headers
Subject: Re: "X-" blithering (really X-Mailer)
Message-ID: <660@ontenv.UUCP>
Date: 8 Aug 88 05:14:28 GMT
Organization: Ontario Ministry of the Environment, Toronto
Lines: 27


There's been a great deal of carping about the X-Mailer header that's
floating around.  I'll grant that right now these things are about
as useful as a Royal Commission. But in time... 

One of the things that X-headers can be used for is to implement special 
features such as confirmation of reciept, encrypted mail, various content 
types and so on (please don't assume that I'm suggesting that all of these
things are appropriate for the net, some, like confirmation of recipt,
most definitely aren't, but I needed some examples). 

It's a reality that some of these features are going to end up being 
implemented differently in different user agents, at least until the dust 
settles. So the only way for a recieving ua to deal with a X-feature that could
have multiple interpretations is to know what ua generated the message.
So presto, by combining the X-Mailer and X-feature headers you're sure
to get the right interpretation. Eventually of course RFC-822 will get
supercede/updated to handle new features and then we can lose the
X-Mailer stuff.

As for the net.bad.citizenry of Portal's X-Orgin header... Well my
Mother always told me If you can't say anything nice...
-- 
Norman Soley - Data Communications Analyst - Ontario Ministry of the Environment
UUCP:	utgpu!ontmoh!------------\              VOICE:	+1 416 323 2623
	{attcan,utzoo}!lsuc!ncrcan!ontenv!norm	
             "witty saying not available due to writers strike"