IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [ietf-smtp] Possible cont4ibution to moving forward with RFC5321bis SMTP

"John Levine" <johnl@taugh.com> Sun, 29 December 2019 22:30 UTC

Return-Path: <johnl@iecc.com>
X-Original-To: ietf-smtp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf-smtp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F60F1200C3 for <ietf-smtp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 29 Dec 2019 14:30:50 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.75
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.75 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.25, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1536-bit key) header.d=iecc.com header.b=G3MNJXA5; dkim=pass (1536-bit key) header.d=taugh.com header.b=N5L4d/VL
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 EpG9wwLr6nHb for <ietf-smtp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 29 Dec 2019 14:30:49 -0800 (PST)
Received: from gal.iecc.com (gal.iecc.com [IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126:0:43:6f73:7461]) (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 6719F12006F for <ietf-smtp@ietf.org>; Sun, 29 Dec 2019 14:30:49 -0800 (PST)
Received: (qmail 69857 invoked from network); 29 Dec 2019 22:30:47 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=iecc.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=110dc.5e092917.k1912; i=printer-iecc.com@submit.iecc.com; bh=6fepC3W4tvIFF4eartiMQ+5thRaIsU2qvkrAP7f69qc=; b=G3MNJXA5gkXAK9jPA4IiQsRKZ60BmISWf13JLwOlevz41roq7xzIlK+2T0KVGl5J5wsSbFlZUSHk0j3aE5Uy8hxN8bXQGzzHQXkZ9s7I2L8W1tc9C5T0NMd/9B+/wj9oMKcyQuB/WhqT7lMtnn5DUVevR5ZqUE30qclJDM92Isn2gtE3jdsDvkwiV7eilwfaTnf3jEO//UbjJTn31AiQaItMUICdllh5Qljq6EZsnsgel2EDVquJEc+aDiPTgwUg
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=taugh.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=110dc.5e092917.k1912; olt=printer-iecc.com@submit.iecc.com; bh=6fepC3W4tvIFF4eartiMQ+5thRaIsU2qvkrAP7f69qc=; b=N5L4d/VL+tlpd+n33nqsjlQv9j6ntqe29ZZYv3gj9BDblGc+MPzTbdRPZR6fPzQyejKFPH5RUoywQW9RlGUXkMFrpz0upTDQc/YFNczdVBvqezmRmkUQ+Elebnn8RRTp5XhOs3XUgoH+aK8RLr7cNO9hrqeXdf1LJ+m8rBjqL0oZSAde1xlLIk/gfkB+S0caw/qLKxjw0azOfxLef0pIHOELzoU8SPi23en2M1b+VDcbSYiZYhW6aOW3CnZJ5lxu
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 ESMTPSA (TLS1.2 ECDHE-RSA AES-256-GCM AEAD, printer@iecc.com) via TCP6; 29 Dec 2019 22:30:46 -0000
Received: by ary.qy (Postfix, from userid 501) id 6128111D2537; Sun, 29 Dec 2019 17:30:46 -0500 (EST)
Date: Sun, 29 Dec 2019 17:30:46 -0500
Message-Id: <20191229223046.6128111D2537@ary.qy>
From: John Levine <johnl@taugh.com>
To: ietf-smtp@ietf.org
Cc: barryleiba@computer.org
In-Reply-To: <CALaySJKn4M_O1eKTFWxtOF_VPpqDS8fPQVqmtVC6q8_pUxL9RA@mail.gmail.com>
Organization: Taughannock Networks
X-Headerized: yes
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf-smtp/12m19Cz0-mgHSeEPAxJS6IKtdwQ>
Subject: Re: [ietf-smtp] Possible cont4ibution to moving forward with RFC5321bis SMTP
X-BeenThere: ietf-smtp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Discussion of issues related to Simple Mail Transfer Protocol \(SMTP\) \[RFC 821, RFC 2821, RFC 5321\]" <ietf-smtp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf-smtp>, <mailto:ietf-smtp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf-smtp/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf-smtp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-smtp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-smtp>, <mailto:ietf-smtp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 29 Dec 2019 22:30:51 -0000

In article <CALaySJKn4M_O1eKTFWxtOF_VPpqDS8fPQVqmtVC6q8_pUxL9RA@mail.gmail.com> you write:
>I'd like to see us then address some of these other issues in a
>separate document, which can go out as BCP or Proposed Standard
>(applicability statement) -- and there are other options as well --
>that would aim to give normative advice about these sorts of things
>but that is not part of the Internet-Standard level spec at this
>point.
>
>Is there substantial objection to taking that approach?

Sounds good to me, keeping in mind that the putative goal of a
standard is to tell people how to interoperate with everyone else.

R's,
John

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email