Date: 20 Sep 2026 15:41:04 -0400
Message-Id: <20260920194104.BDCDC12073125@ary.qy>
From: "John Levine" <johnl@ietf.email>
To: emailcore@ietf.org, last-call@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <arAkw7pDK7JPFjTT@chardros.imrryr.org>
Organization: Taughannock Networks
References: 
 <CAChr6SzV8Vsur5T5uaCry0ZxrJT9n54ia2dCwsqP8U8K+gQhBw@mail.gmail.com>
 <0786af40-4c4a-4670-a71e-eeed0596c7d8@lear.ch>
 <arADNYbear-_QgRh@chardros.imrryr.org> <1FE6D8319E6156C7A0044D7E@PSB>
 <arAkw7pDK7JPFjTT@chardros.imrryr.org>
Cleverness: minimal
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit
Message-ID-Hash: 5DFQF7TW57MKO3H7GVZC6R5F2ZB47QGC
Precedence: list
Subject: [Emailcore] Re: [Last-Call] Re: Your (Roman's) DISCUSS on
 draft-ietf-emailcore-as and status of the document
Archived-At: 
 <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/emailcore/Id74fXT3Li5WJekiXOUIY9LeZyw>

It appears that Viktor Dukhovni  <emailcore@ietf.org> said:
>> Ok.  But what does it mean _for the document_ to "concede" that?
>
>In reality nothing.  Just full disclosure in reaction to Elliot's
>"I known of nobody who does".  I've run into some who do.  But I
>don't see a reason to change the document.

I believe Viktor but I also see no reason to believe that they handle
mail for anyone but themselves.

As we might have noted a few hundred times we have talked to a lot of
large mail operators and their uniform response to the suggestion that
they refuse unencrypted mail can be summarized as "no, that would be stupid."

I really wish people would stop pretending otherwise.

R's,
John