[Emailcore] Proposed ESMTP keyword RCPTLIMIT

Jeremy Harris <jgh@wizmail.org> Fri, 12 March 2021 15:46 UTC

Return-Path: <jgh@wizmail.org>
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 E7D253A13AF for <emailcore@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 12 Mar 2021 07:46:17 -0800 (PST)
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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=neutral reason="invalid (unsupported algorithm ed25519-sha256)" header.d=wizmail.org header.b=GfUNIkkr; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=wizmail.org header.b=Ty0hY7lG
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 I9AWz-SJHw1O for <emailcore@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 12 Mar 2021 07:46:16 -0800 (PST)
Received: from wizmail.org (wizmail.org [IPv6:2a00:1940:107::2:0:0]) (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 23EF93A13B6 for <emailcore@ietf.org>; Fri, 12 Mar 2021 07:46:16 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=wizmail.org; s=e202001; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type: In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Date:Message-ID:Subject:From:References:To:From: Sender:Reply-To:Subject:Date:Message-ID:To:Cc:MIME-Version:Content-Type: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:In-Reply-To: References:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:List-Post: List-Owner:List-Archive:Autocrypt; bh=TWueydYxycen0dcJXSLp9pBsZhtx9sVCDDB2f3tFeBA=; b=GfUNIkkrsnJycRbDiTA/jsbmcN YyQWvFi/K6VDFDKzldHYWRR683k2+CQxkHAAdVB5ma6pVMMcsqjJFCO01fAA==;
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=wizmail.org ; s=r202001; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:In-Reply-To: MIME-Version:Date:Message-ID:Subject:From:References:To:From:Sender:Reply-To: Subject:Date:Message-ID:To:Cc:MIME-Version:Content-Type: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:In-Reply-To: References:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:List-Post: List-Owner:List-Archive:Autocrypt; bh=TWueydYxycen0dcJXSLp9pBsZhtx9sVCDDB2f3tFeBA=; b=Ty0hY7lGGhS4/Y4Qmv2kss4XtI UkZvF+srVAIN9aln1ADKw1mQbB9CVC3cPrxhoUzLPBRrw44gOhCegBt0RmBT2YpXqo63ejSVnK9/3 CGjp3tIP4lVgRw3GZ08O1TIyGGda9qs/OFkALJwUzBM2vuMiyIBEyOPvknTe5Qw1FXne4m63A3v6G NPkw9QRVqe/gDfqsZxuQmYuUk6YnEReQDAIumCe/xCQw7+00cewf5GegyeGLnQAdsgGnjGC1E/Nae oZ0wzySKQhapt55oDZ+ThP2pjXJLpKoPBbsV9gR/fCFgS07RFSiPJRv0CDYrj9gwC3Kvb0uzDfkab ThzKejfQ==;
Authentication-Results: wizmail.org; iprev=fail smtp.remote-ip=46.33.133.68; auth=pass (PLAIN) smtp.auth=jgh@wizmail.org
Received: from [46.33.133.68] (helo=lap.dom.ain) (from_AS 51561) by wizmail.org (Exim 4.94.116) (TLS1.3) tls TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 with esmtpsa id 1lKjzR-002OUd-2b for emailcore@ietf.org (return-path <jgh@wizmail.org>); Fri, 12 Mar 2021 15:46:13 +0000
To: emailcore@ietf.org
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.c om> <0F2370D0-D04C-45A1-A5A1-8FF1F174FFE5@dukhovni.org> <CAHej_8=deJU1CW2AzDBu5ji3Uir+_zF6Gp59Z-hHRmRipz8Osw@mail.gmail.com> <9A7BDB22F3A0396EF24BF91D@PSB> <5772045E-2EB3-44B7-BCA8-0135DF809C62@dukhovni.org>
From: Jeremy Harris <jgh@wizmail.org>
Message-ID: <68cd718f-3bf5-3906-25e1-94ecfdb0ba2f@wizmail.org>
Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2021 15:46:12 +0000
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <5772045E-2EB3-44B7-BCA8-0135DF809C62@dukhovni.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Language: en-GB
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Pcms-Received-Sender: [46.33.133.68] (helo=lap.dom.ain) with esmtpsa
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/emailcore/Kfb_EgmjUdwDcrah9StAgsvYYEs>
Subject: [Emailcore] Proposed ESMTP keyword RCPTLIMIT
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: Fri, 12 Mar 2021 15:46:18 -0000

On 11/03/2021 23:29, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
> <quote 3>
>     When a conforming SMTP server encounters this condition, it has at
>     least 100 successful RCPT commands in its recipients buffer.  If the
>     server is able to accept the message, then at least these 100
>     addresses will be removed from the SMTP client's queue.
> </quote 3>
> 
> I wish that were true.  It would certainly aid interoperability.
> But the said 800lb gorilla providers have felt free to dictate
> arbitrary limits below the RFC requirements

This is outside the current work item, but:

We should consider a new method for the server to advertise limits
on RCPT before use; this would be more efficient given pipelining.

Perhaps an ESTMP keyword "RCPTLIMIT" taking parameters
   MAX=nnn
   SINGLE_DOMAIN

These would be advisory for the client; the server would still have
to apply limits via responses to RCPT commands, and the client MUST
NOT take any different action to command responses based on the EHLO
keyword seen.  The client SHOULD choose command sequences based
on the EHLO keyword parameters, for example by issuing no more than
<nnn> RCPT commands in any single transaction performed on this connection.
-- 
Cheers,
   Jeremy