IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Emailcore] Ticket #5: G.5. Remove or deprecate the work-around from code 552 to 452?

Alexey Melnikov <aamelnikov@fastmail.fm> Sun, 28 March 2021 13:03 UTC

Return-Path: <aamelnikov@fastmail.fm>
X-Original-To: emailcore@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: emailcore@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AFDBE3A1B60 for <emailcore@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 28 Mar 2021 06:03:15 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.096
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.096 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, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=fastmail.fm header.b=SzleDx3N; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=BfUd530R
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 tgjt9PctfGL0 for <emailcore@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 28 Mar 2021 06:03:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from wout4-smtp.messagingengine.com (wout4-smtp.messagingengine.com [64.147.123.20]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BB42C3A1B58 for <emailcore@ietf.org>; Sun, 28 Mar 2021 06:03:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.internal [10.202.2.41]) by mailout.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id A19771706; Sun, 28 Mar 2021 09:03:09 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from imap37 ([10.202.2.87]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Sun, 28 Mar 2021 09:03:09 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=fastmail.fm; h= mime-version:message-id:in-reply-to:references:date:from:to :subject:content-type; s=fm2; bh=2eAvDxtCsfiItwW5TitnswWzrduGiDR xnqJzxeUwAcE=; b=SzleDx3NLOPuvzKu0A4hP8GWIbvnk3K+X6b0il89vTp2sna 72xbR5LMheK936snxs12qVkV0v+nkVu2oJJD8kDILtimBH+bOD3Y+gBTf8wtGNTL JLcZM5O/HvjxDKA/CvVFjeEfZK4K9flLZ/cS8XDSZDaSOuz83Y4+iOy+nDSWCxS8 YjncQm5V1GrOuXwuTcEuArxpAM2ykkW0qX+u8M3ZIus5uwriUrG6NWk/Idzk8VFV iuJ/Zyk5PRBKn3jJU01ioCg83FQbRBMJroQ0BgNpbIZxBdhmRLA3wgcjsyjvGetW jj6smqWtjMP6pk7ybmVyVk+aTUkxR2+FqlsPAQQ==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-proxy :x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=2eAvDx tCsfiItwW5TitnswWzrduGiDRxnqJzxeUwAcE=; b=BfUd530RpHSsJHy3iWsCpz T7YkiisytITAUJSUgWDPjLSgHvXBya/1UnTuR8pfoXzpwx2KN/Dq6R1UECJ6Pkxc JlsLiFdEgUl5MjTM227EwhHv6yA8VeXm7XG2TTuouDBEjxzJyv+4f96M6y/KnKko z4SZ1s2KIgYMfdzGepAmKDi5Ql10RDViygwROEZZ9xZ4+sPuDyDyniCWolXxbg7P k2HaTshkL94MwMHA+yBDXv/LkGseXG3r02kQNaJbGw6a0TDkuX15/rAFQE/uH3dA kvsXvWopyXXwDlcWpJY9P17OgzRS7BpAjilGXBOMtpP1TmKxpynM1bVMsoqj827Q ==
X-ME-Sender: <xms:i35gYPPiBshTJ2-5C7l4b06UtyRQcU92zK2Mmq3BEf_rj1e-yfsOnw> <xme:i35gYJ8Pz5Rel_AOAEDQwRGaOI-XNbvykgG6k6ztadyD7eFAv42wcNGxwb6FwoBSB X11KpB2-1AC-jDVrw>
X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduledrudehiedgiedtucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucenucfjughrpefofgggkfgjfhffhffvufgtsehttd ertderreejnecuhfhrohhmpedftehlvgigvgihucfovghlnhhikhhovhdfuceorggrmhgv lhhnihhkohhvsehfrghsthhmrghilhdrfhhmqeenucggtffrrghtthgvrhhnpeeitdeuhe dthfevvdethfegledufeeugfdvjedvheehfeevuedtgedufeegudfhtdenucevlhhushht vghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpegrrghmvghlnhhikhhovh esfhgrshhtmhgrihhlrdhfmh
X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:i35gYOTYJqSFKPQ-mMrIaXVEdzr9NLRA7sG6c8z4d_zxI17L94eAAg> <xmx:i35gYDuderofYwliWYMRBAXlgdjcJKt6U9xTbOApFd8wsdb45I1AzQ> <xmx:i35gYHe4H-gMmKhdPvLVInpVc14ZHUwjkgaR7COO2VvApiLiHgZ_mA> <xmx:jX5gYFr3IzygNOcYxGybcHitaS4y09b_lQdAZfwA5Dvrb76X4WJFXA>
Received: by mailuser.nyi.internal (Postfix, from userid 501) id DBD706B40061; Sun, 28 Mar 2021 09:03:07 -0400 (EDT)
X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface
User-Agent: Cyrus-JMAP/3.5.0-alpha0-273-g8500d2492d-fm-20210323.002-g8500d249
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <2fd6ac6c-5676-4134-bcce-928145d488b4@www.fastmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <420176B328E2416BF3351C95@PSB>
References: <ca851fda-63ac-8739-c3eb-bde725aa25f3@isode.com> <c188413b-9337-40d8-8062-9c0f58f6cd98@www.fastmail.com> <CAHej_8kHwEOmq5bf49=Tt6ZEVkuidMhy5s4XPu7JC+k22qraZg@mail.gmail.com> <CAHej_8ma-kDkVh3Oj11R5Fn6BbwJsWfFpx0Zqv61fPL35CJNUA@mail.gmail.com> <0F2370D0-D04C-45A1-A5A1-8FF1F174FFE5@dukhovni.org> <CAHej_8=deJU1CW2AzDBu5ji3Uir+_zF6Gp59Z-hHRmRipz8Osw@mail.gmail.com> <9A7BDB22F3A0396EF24BF91D@PSB> <397cc52c-5533-12a2-6ca2-e46f5987105c@wizmail.org> <F57F0BCCE67A6D1CE8BC3157@PSB> <6FC2E8E6-334A-4C4B-9FB6-A0F2805C4A31@dukhovni.org> <420176B328E2416BF3351C95@PSB>
Date: Sun, 28 Mar 2021 14:02:46 +0100
From: Alexey Melnikov <aamelnikov@fastmail.fm>
To: John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com>, emailcore@ietf.org
Content-Type: text/plain
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/emailcore/EHDu_zPNajzah9Z1UDXPYD3cdpo>
Subject: Re: [Emailcore] Ticket #5: G.5. Remove or deprecate the work-around from code 552 to 452?
X-BeenThere: emailcore@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: EMAILCORE proposed working group list <emailcore.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/emailcore>, <mailto:emailcore-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/emailcore/>
List-Post: <mailto:emailcore@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:emailcore-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/emailcore>, <mailto:emailcore-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 28 Mar 2021 13:03:16 -0000

Hi John,

Trying to concentrate on the specific text about treating 552 in response to RCPT TO as 452: based on feedback from Victor and Jeremy (and I can confirm that Isode's MTA is doing the same), I don't believe implementations are actually 552 in response to RCPT TO as 452. So I think the SHOULD requirement should be removed, with possibly some note in the document that this has changed. Do you agree?

Best Regards,
Alexey

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email