[apps-discuss] The SMTP 521 reply code, RFC 1846, and nullMX

John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com> Mon, 02 March 2015 14:30 UTC

Return-Path: <john-ietf@jck.com>
X-Original-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 567921A877B for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 2 Mar 2015 06:30:37 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.61
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.61 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id b3w_06n6zC-L for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 2 Mar 2015 06:30:35 -0800 (PST)
Received: from bsa2.jck.com (ns.jck.com [70.88.254.51]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A88C61A8774 for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Mon, 2 Mar 2015 06:30:35 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [198.252.137.35] (helo=JcK-HP8200.jck.com) by bsa2.jck.com with esmtp (Exim 4.82 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from <john-ietf@jck.com>) id 1YSRMc-0001AD-KM; Mon, 02 Mar 2015 09:30:30 -0500
Date: Mon, 02 Mar 2015 09:30:25 -0500
From: John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com>
To: Pete Resnick <presnick@qti.qualcomm.com>, Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org>, John Levine <johnl@taugh.com>
Message-ID: <9BAFB425A5757D4381D157FB@JcK-HP8200.jck.com>
X-Mailer: Mulberry/4.0.8 (Win32)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline
X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 198.252.137.35
X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: john-ietf@jck.com
X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on bsa2.jck.com); SAEximRunCond expanded to false
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/apps-discuss/FOSEoe6xwIgqlGXFxD9r5ecfFWw>
Cc: apps-discuss@ietf.org
Subject: [apps-discuss] The SMTP 521 reply code, RFC 1846, and nullMX
X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: Mon, 02 Mar 2015 14:30:37 -0000

Hi.

There was a lot of activity around this in the middle of last
year, largely because of the nullMX draft
(draft-ietf-appsawg-nullmx).  According to the tracker, nullMX
has been sitting in the RFC Editor queue since mid-September, in
part because it contains a normative reference to
draft-klensin-smtp-521code.  I think the assumption was that a
quick Last Call was going to be done on the latter I-D, possibly
through appsawg, but nothing has ever happened.

According to the Secretariat's automatic system,
draft-klensin-smtp-521code-02.txt expires next week.

I'm happy to update and repost it if there is a plan to move it
forward.  Or I can let it expire, thereby either killing the
nullMX draft or requiring that it be reissued with a different
strategy and presumably a new Last Call.

Please advise.

    john


---------- Forwarded Message ----------
Date: Monday, March 02, 2015 04:42 -0800
From: IETF Secretariat <ietf-secretariat-reply@ietf.org>
To: "John C. Klensin" <john-ietf@jck.com>
Subject: Expiration impending:
<draft-klensin-smtp-521code-02.txt>

The following draft will expire soon:

Name:     draft-klensin-smtp-521code
Title:    SMTP 521 and 556 Reply Codes
State:    I-D Exists
Expires:  2015-03-11 (in 1 week, 1 day)


---------- End Forwarded Message ----------