Re: [dispatch] Forced SMTP redirects
John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> Fri, 10 July 2020 01:59 UTC
Return-Path: <johnl@iecc.com>
X-Original-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2EB773A0BCA for <dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 9 Jul 2020 18:59:47 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.851
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.851 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.249, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1536-bit key) header.d=iecc.com header.b=nqZ7A9ac; dkim=pass (1536-bit key) header.d=taugh.com header.b=Zune74/L
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 3qJPDHOqWdO1 for <dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 9 Jul 2020 18:59:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from gal.iecc.com (gal.iecc.com [IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126:0:43:6f73:7461]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4206A3A0BC7 for <dispatch@ietf.org>; Thu, 9 Jul 2020 18:59:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 39746 invoked from network); 10 Jul 2020 01:59:41 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=iecc.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=9b3c.5f07cb8d.k2007; bh=/3xM7GDPFxLIu3nbpynF3jEhZDCKe15qSkPqufwK1nM=; b=nqZ7A9ac0o3Fffvzc99ux06jjszH1e/QPliwwjniMiHrvKvy04CVQuvjiopFG7xn1RCexfMjsX7hWf/Y9kLlab76jxkpU4HddM6O1mnXEYa0Bxh1cwXAGxkc/nkGaOFEmW+B5y4PburIX2HBtyKx1PSffWXd1oQMhu5sgsdhUPV7O0hQv9hK7yulVTIMstdeTfxg2DuOtqD9Kt8M/AE8Zo7N8kDxUnkdwzn7qKeJj/pUwlJhTIGDnjg6tFMfT+d9
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=taugh.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=9b3c.5f07cb8d.k2007; bh=/3xM7GDPFxLIu3nbpynF3jEhZDCKe15qSkPqufwK1nM=; b=Zune74/LhZ8oGbR4FXOr9ZqfhthFzAtKKTKP8H6vw7IRR6IRCzy2JbBtga6pSXadb0ADrET339hCAfzmWDQbq0NqxZOJyJYSnKoA3dIR4819XM2oQ9bYIsrlhAk6a2GK/kCgus9dflum5LL2sbhQ3gdyoMoB52YEJ1VNETTR5/Km593/b2kv+oATTYlm9alDzt2pjp+KGkT1J1ApA1MqhZNxhsPTbTOU4gTXJ+iBkKGeGIGzcugnmVRwkNJaeepk
Received: from ary.qy ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) by imap.iecc.com ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) with ESMTP via TCP6; 10 Jul 2020 01:59:40 -0000
Received: by ary.qy (Postfix, from userid 501) id 0BE2D1C78A2F; Thu, 9 Jul 2020 21:59:47 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Thu, 09 Jul 2020 21:59:47 -0400
Message-Id: <20200710015947.0BE2D1C78A2F@ary.qy>
From: John Levine <johnl@taugh.com>
To: dispatch@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <CAKFo7wkawgk-Yj676kE5MqK8XuebuArMexH-eOdq_Uo7ijdimQ@mail.gmail.com>
Organization: Taughannock Networks
X-Headerized: yes
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dispatch/bU_as_co7F8mUoqTdrqMBfUA-B8>
Subject: Re: [dispatch] Forced SMTP redirects
X-BeenThere: dispatch@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: DISPATCH Working Group Mail List <dispatch.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dispatch>, <mailto:dispatch-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dispatch/>
List-Post: <mailto:dispatch@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dispatch-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dispatch>, <mailto:dispatch-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 10 Jul 2020 01:59:47 -0000
I'd suggest reposting this to the ietf-smtp list where people who've been around a lot longer than I have can explain why nobody implements 551 redirects (and as far as I can tell, nobody ever did) and there is assigning a different response code won't change that. It may seem like a good idea, but turns out not to work in practice. FWIW I looked through the last seven months of my mail server's logs and the total number of 551 responses is zero. R's, John PS: There have been some attempts at setting up change-of-address services where you can register old and new addresses, so mail servers could query them after getting a 550, and they never went anywhere either. See US Patents 6,654,789, 6,892,222, and 7,080,122. On the other hand, a lot of mail systems now let users keep their addresses after they leave, ranging from ISPs like Comcast and Spectrum to universities who turn student addresses into alumni addresses. They let you forward the mail, or you can add it to the list of accounts your MUA checks, or either or both. In article <CAKFo7wkawgk-Yj676kE5MqK8XuebuArMexH-eOdq_Uo7ijdimQ@mail.gmail.com> you write: >Hello everyone, > > >I have published a new internet-draft that might be of interest. > > >As always, its on the Datatracker: > >https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-sam-smtp-redirects/
- [dispatch] Forced SMTP redirects E Sam
- Re: [dispatch] Forced SMTP redirects John Levine