IETF Logo Mail Archive

[ietf-822] Re: Comment on experimental RFC9078

John R Levine <johnl@taugh.com> Wed, 17 July 2024 19:58 UTC

Return-Path: <johnl@taugh.com>
X-Original-To: ietf-822@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf-822@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE27AC151525 for <ietf-822@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 17 Jul 2024 12:58:41 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.107
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.107 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_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=iecc.com header.b="VNQYsAsY"; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=taugh.com header.b="HRqr/0ta"
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id pU5Nk0AdHsAM for <ietf-822@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 17 Jul 2024 12:58:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from gal.iecc.com (gal.iecc.com [IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126:0:43:6f73:7461]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EC5F7C15109D for <ietf-822@ietf.org>; Wed, 17 Jul 2024 12:58:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 20348 invoked from network); 17 Jul 2024 19:58:34 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed; d=iecc.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=4f7a6698226a.k2407; bh=RVMvYz1lCTqFeEUVpoI/qXO62LNPukLsVc3HrNxtc9k=; b=VNQYsAsYyPfwSZPbUoir2B63MrpYrir60Phx1UOthTphBR8ywKLHJV/6dj0+VHVFB+yx0XlLCKYsH/SJc2GZ/RC33vx+d+hWu24bPRTZ3CGVxmeYtBAZIrGK13MZO9qF5trxWXPB+LUQoH/Fwo5kQvE/+DPDXWFTogHBBbG8frdf3JhT1OQWH2lMNpBjffOLHJm9/gM84oa8Ky68qhrMVEtXI9z56c1mwImrY8dH//w3MOv7IbSPXaHlEKD9prAaHuPDZ8JMger/27X4kFLdFw3+Ds85DMJ0ov4vd09Vak3f3WxKc/pPCxYLi5axGm41PB5LvRbXrB46GDrbpBdMjw==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed; d=taugh.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=4f7a6698226a.k2407; bh=RVMvYz1lCTqFeEUVpoI/qXO62LNPukLsVc3HrNxtc9k=; b=HRqr/0talQRGis+dbFU3r6/jjBuN/iYGLAFcmHdU5h8+UKkRqNp/jLaTDcjGF0QsLYF98FlMfs6qBF0NiHqYMzpwCH2wwyQHr1fFYNZowGOfsC7unog8l0IdDv6FKSdncuw3DzqnB0h7PrdGG+RIof9FswcErQxLp/ghOO0vYIDOW59JLYodGHq6K0P1K1tN+ORgNKoGHHpmC3yMhRylju6M2S3Z7mOXYirhSF/sGOFkE/q1DCzIzoQ/q9dCcK+i87KAIfQQJ9zsxzJDQoVK7ELmm5Nd4NOm3VL7vfmNAbWyuR+h3alUJFePypLaZZUEvvplFw+ciXiz/oULfsSntw==
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 ESMTPS (TLS1.3 ECDHE-RSA CHACHA20-POLY1305 AEAD) via TCP6; 17 Jul 2024 19:58:34 -0000
Received: by ary.qy (Postfix, from userid 501) id C36018FF51E7; Wed, 17 Jul 2024 15:58:33 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ary.qy (Postfix) with ESMTP id 24F528FF51C9; Wed, 17 Jul 2024 15:58:33 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2024 15:58:33 -0400
Message-ID: <1a5558ee-0e9d-d31d-37dc-1c19bea7f3e9@taugh.com>
From: John R Levine <johnl@taugh.com>
To: Dave Crocker <dcrocker@bbiw.net>, ietf-822@ietf.org
X-X-Sender: johnl@ary.qy
In-Reply-To: <da2d57ec-6925-4fe3-9991-138fb617bade@dcrocker.net>
References: <5cb8ef6f-2b29-4a98-aa87-caad69a8362d@karlewald.de> <20240717174311.36CF98FF23D0@ary.qy> <da2d57ec-6925-4fe3-9991-138fb617bade@dcrocker.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format="flowed"; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID-Hash: EBOOGLWYF6K6KLGUXJTXEF63ALF7ZPX2
X-Message-ID-Hash: EBOOGLWYF6K6KLGUXJTXEF63ALF7ZPX2
X-MailFrom: johnl@taugh.com
X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; header-match-ietf-822.ietf.org-0; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header
X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.9rc4
Precedence: list
Subject: [ietf-822] Re: Comment on experimental RFC9078
List-Id: "Discussion of issues related to Internet Message Format [RFC 822, RFC 2822, RFC 5322]" <ietf-822.ietf.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf-822/Xi3qu8J_TdN1n1KOIo08BrSby9k>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf-822>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-822-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Owner: <mailto:ietf-822-owner@ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf-822@ietf.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:ietf-822-join@ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:ietf-822-leave@ietf.org>

On Wed, 17 Jul 2024, Dave Crocker wrote:

> On 7/17/2024 10:43 AM, John Levine wrote:
>> Beyond bikeshedding about the name (I like Reaction-Enabled) this is
>> an obvious good idea. We should have thought of it before we published
>> 9078.
>
> This is a special case of generally indicating the replies will not be 
> accepted.  Or maybe just that they are not desired.

It's more subtle than that.  If you have a UA that understands reactions, 
it can display them in a way that makes sense, but if you don't, as he 
said, they're ugly and annoying.  This is a hint to the recipient's system 
whether to enable the reaction menu or just regular replies.

> So while it is certainly a reasonable idea, it is probably significant that 
> there has not yet been a general interest in communicating such a 
> restriction.

It's not very different from the endless wars about whether to reply to 
the author of a list message or just to the list.  It's a hint about what 
the previous author would like.  Lists have used reply-to but not very 
successfully.  A "Reply-Also-To-Me: nope" header in that context could be 
useful, too.

R's,
John

v2.35.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status