Re: [apps-discuss] Comments on Malformed Message BCP draft

Keith Moore <moore@network-heretics.com> Fri, 15 April 2011 17:48 UTC

Return-Path: <moore@network-heretics.com>
X-Original-To: apps-discuss@ietfc.amsl.com
Delivered-To: apps-discuss@ietfc.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2982AE0801 for <apps-discuss@ietfc.amsl.com>; Fri, 15 Apr 2011 10:48:42 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([208.66.40.236]) by localhost (ietfc.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id DLP-E6imkVN2 for <apps-discuss@ietfc.amsl.com>; Fri, 15 Apr 2011 10:48:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out2.smtp.messagingengine.com (out2.smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.26]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7C787E07F7 for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Fri, 15 Apr 2011 10:48:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from compute5.internal (compute5.nyi.mail.srv.osa [10.202.2.45]) by gateway1.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 12D1321E1C; Fri, 15 Apr 2011 13:48:37 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from frontend1.messagingengine.com ([10.202.2.160]) by compute5.internal (MEProxy); Fri, 15 Apr 2011 13:48:37 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=messagingengine.com; h=subject:mime-version:content-type:from:in-reply-to:date:cc:content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; s=smtpout; bh=yb7oRCX59zsD6IpVpdvJZgJCGks=; b=jqgXbpT1NGUfQBj0XGGRhMBBTSurih5uw4+ow9kXAdXJtaFTACEUjhTM9I0hnmzpA8CG3ruoWcNjTwiiC1ZfCKIcnDzBOzeFCbsU7Wz4t9HuiB6/bJLDh7yvLJHrYMHzOpVqqaGEubRzUa/2ily1aMxELmqVLHF6qAMbqvlQ5a0=
X-Sasl-enc: fhDbgG+e2t35eEksh4ixm1NiMxpoYe4rlmtfyZrnug5Y 1302889716
Received: from host65-16-145-177.birch.net (host65-16-145-177.birch.net [65.16.145.177]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 392C6404659; Fri, 15 Apr 2011 13:48:36 -0400 (EDT)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
From: Keith Moore <moore@network-heretics.com>
In-Reply-To: <4DA878B4.9060007@dcrocker.net>
Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2011 13:48:35 -0400
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <B5B267BE-98C6-40F3-9D37-0CE95AE5F1D4@network-heretics.com>
References: <F5833273385BB34F99288B3648C4F06F1343319E22@EXCH-C2.corp.cloudmark.com> <CEDB17EC-80CE-49B5-91C1-FBCB0449BBA5@network-heretics.com> <4DA8542F.9040003@tana.it> <F5833273385BB34F99288B3648C4F06F1343319E51@EXCH-C2.corp.cloudmark.com> <4DA876B6.9050700@dcrocker.net> <3111.1302886470.781218@puncture> <4DA878B4.9060007@dcrocker.net>
To: dcrocker@bbiw.net
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1084)
Cc: ietf-822 <ietf-822@imc.org>, General discussion of application-layer protocols <apps-discuss@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] Comments on Malformed Message BCP draft
X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols <apps-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/apps-discuss>
List-Post: <mailto:apps-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2011 17:48:42 -0000

I do think there's room for some sort of "if you must do this bad thing, please do it this way" document series from IETF.

However, I don't think that would be applicable to having third party mail relays repair malformed messages.  I think that's no longer "best way to do something that has the potential to do harm" and closer to "how to make a bad situation worse".  

Of course, the devil is in the details.

Keith

On Apr 15, 2011, at 12:56 PM, Dave CROCKER wrote:

> 
> 
> 
> On 4/15/2011 9:54 AM, Dave Cridland wrote:
>> I've heard the suggestion of LWP - Least Worst Practise - before.
> 
> 
> I like that /much/ better than what I suggested.  Concise, accurate and appropriately apologetic.
> 
> d/
> 
> -- 
> 
>  Dave Crocker
>  Brandenburg InternetWorking
>  bbiw.net
>