IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [ietf-smtp] [Proposal] confusing parts of the mail system, was 250-MARKDOWN

Ned Freed <ned.freed@mrochek.com> Sun, 13 January 2019 17:18 UTC

Return-Path: <ned.freed@mrochek.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 662941274D0 for <ietf-smtp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 13 Jan 2019 09:18:21 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.208
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.208 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RDNS_NONE=0.793, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=mrochek.com
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 Blq-_k2ebdx0 for <ietf-smtp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 13 Jan 2019 09:18:20 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mauve.mrochek.com (unknown [66.159.242.17]) (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 04EE0124BE5 for <ietf-smtp@ietf.org>; Sun, 13 Jan 2019 09:18:20 -0800 (PST)
Received: from dkim-sign.mauve.mrochek.com by mauve.mrochek.com (PMDF V6.1-1 #35243) id <01R1YI5XMNV400FH3S@mauve.mrochek.com> for ietf-smtp@ietf.org; Sun, 13 Jan 2019 09:13:13 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=mrochek.com; s=201712; t=1547399592; bh=SZcmKxr7cBcfyvJqvfppPsuXfKSZ3Qa0FMA2V23O0nk=; h=Cc:Date:From:Subject:In-reply-to:References:To:From; b=PScVVkJX0x6gB6VsDMrFog+MsT3JdfxMv1zXDYy7phc3LpwcY8mQ54RJwokeI6T5+ Z3o3Oz3VjokzhcE9JPhpfwxemkjSYViPPG8b77VerIS+yFvJZdq5ksIVVxWgw11hs/ CMzNMMsdxfm5KsiheTWREUkAYV9vLhgjh6X3H51g=
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET="us-ascii"; Format="flowed"
Received: from mauve.mrochek.com by mauve.mrochek.com (PMDF V6.1-1 #35243) id <01R1N39ADWKW00004L@mauve.mrochek.com>; Sun, 13 Jan 2019 09:13:08 -0800 (PST)
Cc: Gene Hightower <gene@digilicious.com>, John Bucy <jbucy@google.com>, ietf-smtp <ietf-smtp@ietf.org>
Message-id: <01R1YI5W24JK00004L@mauve.mrochek.com>
Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2019 09:11:55 -0800
From: Ned Freed <ned.freed@mrochek.com>
In-reply-to: "Your message dated Fri, 11 Jan 2019 16:24:30 -0500" <alpine.OSX.2.21.1901111624090.22582@ary.qy>
References: <CAOEezJTxTN9x_JFXgLidj9k8NVgFTRyqyQc4Aak8UEQuvjiM0w@mail.gmail.com> <20190109143529.33122200C76CAD@ary.local> <460d4589-5517-3762-5764-7474523dd09b@digilicious.com> <01R1U95VCAHI00004L@mauve.mrochek.com> <74e22977-8ee8-c762-4882-b56e5911430e@digilicious.com> <CALui8C2qzp_jBo=YHA+XXBGF6+jigDeEaX24L2bohQBdaXKHwg@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.OSX.2.21.1901101442230.18680@ary.qy> <CALui8C1FHhq0Bc1GOXe1xQ+w5c7td3BuOEhBmB6Jf0DZbXLYXw@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.OSX.2.21.1901101541030.19026@ary.qy> <0f692ab9-c71c-8c15-b3e1-e151c357477a@digilicious.com> <alpine.OSX.2.21.1901111624090.22582@ary.qy>
To: John R Levine <johnl@taugh.com>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf-smtp/6FrjpAxjbdQlto4J2qRMWPasH_M>
Subject: Re: [ietf-smtp] [Proposal] confusing parts of the mail system, was 250-MARKDOWN
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, 13 Jan 2019 17:18:22 -0000

> On Fri, 11 Jan 2019, Gene Hightower wrote:
> >> Rather than do that, I'd rather do different duct tape that stores
> >> the giant blob on an external server via soemthing like drive, box,
> >> or dropbox, and puts a message/external-body part into the message.
> >> See RFC 2017.
> >
> > Or the MTA could sore it.  Make it available via some URL that can be
> > forwarded.  No need for support in the MUA if the MTA can do it.

> Yeah, I think I've seen MTAs that do that.

They do. At submission, security gateway, and final delivery.

				Ned

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email