Re: [Emailcore] Two extra issues

[Alexey Melnikov <[e-mail]>]

Hi John,

On Thu, Dec 17, 2020, at 5:02 AM, John C Klensin wrote:
> Hi.
> 
> As mentioned in my note about ticket #2 sent about an hour ago,
> two additional issues came to my attention (or I was reminded
> about them) while looking at that issue and looking through the
> document.  
> 
> I've put them into the working version of what will become
> draft-ietf-emailcore-rfc5321bis-01 as:
> 
>        ----
> 
>  G.12.  Extension Keywords Starting in 'X-'
> 
>    Section 2.2.2 contains a discussion of SMTP keywords starting
> in "X".
>    Given general experience with such things and RFC 6648, is
> there any
>    reason to not deprecate that practice entirely and remove
> that text?
>    If we do so, should Section 4.1.5 be dropped or rewritten to
> make
>    clear this is an obsolete practice?

New ticket: <https://trac.ietf.org/trac/emailcore/ticket/42>
 
>  G.13.  Deprecating HELO
> 
>    RFC 5321 (and 2821 before it) very carefully circle around
> the status
>    of HELO, even recommending its use as a fallback when EHLO is
> sent
>    and a "command not recognized" response is received.  We are
> just a
>    few months short of 20 years; is it time to deprecate the
> thing and
>    clean out some or all of that text?  And, given a recent
> (4Q2020)
>    discussion on the EMAILCORE list, should EHLO be explicitly
> bound to
>    SMTP over TCP with the older transports allowed only with
> HELO?
>    While those questions may seem independent, separating them
> is fairly
>    hard given the way the text is now constructed.

New ticket: <https://trac.ietf.org/trac/emailcore/ticket/43>

> Two more things...
> 
> (1) I think I've figured out how to overlay the ticket numbers
> from https://trac.ietf.org/trac/emailcore/report/1 onto the
> relevant lists in 5321bis where they are applicable, so the
> request for someone to build a table for me is withdrawn -- they
> will be in the next version.
> 
> (2) I await guidance from the WG Chairs as to when to post a new
> version.  My personal preference would be to wait until we have
> at least a few more tickets resolved, but up to them (and the
> WG).

I agree, you should wait until a few more issues are resolved.

Best Regards,
Alexey