Re: [apps-discuss] I-D Action: draft-ietf-appsawg-malformed-mail-02.txt

["Murray S. Kucherawy" <[e-mail]>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Levine [mailto:[e-mail]]
> Sent: Saturday, May 19, 2012 8:56 AM
> To: [e-mail]
> Cc: Murray S. Kucherawy
> Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] I-D Action: draft-ietf-appsawg-malformed-mail-02.txt
> 
> > aim for Standards Track, or if instead I should avoid use of RFC2119
> > language and make leave it Informational.
> 
> I'd prefer that it stay informational.  It seems to me that standards
> should tell people how best to interoperate, and in this case the best
> thing to do is to read the fripping specs and use the correct syntax.
> This draft is offering advice how to try to minimize the damage when
> attempting to recover from mistakes, which is something else.

Based on the few comments on this topic so far, I'd be just fine leaving it as Informational.

> I'd also suggest that the draft emphasize that many kinds of errors are
> strong indicators that a message is spam or contains malware, so the
> best recovery may well be to reject it or throw it away.
> Conversely, if senders want their mail to be delivered, one of the
> easiest ways to make it not look like spam is to make it syntactically
> correct.

I certainly agree with the latter.  I think the former is a little more dangerous, because there are lots of errors that are innocent or ignorant rather than attempts to deceive.  That doesn't make them right, but it does mean drastic measures can have unwanted side effects, just like assuming a failed SPF check or DKIM signature validation is automatically a sign of foul play.

Let's see, how about this as a new Section 1.3, "General Considerations" or something:

Many deviations from what [MAIL] specifies are considered by some receivers to be strong indications that the message is undesirable, i.e., is spam or contains malware.  Such receivers quickly decide that the best handling choice is simply to reject or discard the message.  This means malformations caused by innocent misunderstandings or ignorance of proper syntax can cause messages with no ill intent also to fail to be delivered.

Senders that want to ensure message delivery are best advised to adhere strictly to [MAIL], as well as observe other industry best practices such as may be published either by the IETF or independently from time to time.

?

-MSK