IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [ietf-smtp] SMTP, DSNs, and enhanced replies (was: Re: SMTP server reply extensions)

Ned Freed <ned.freed@mrochek.com> Fri, 10 April 2020 02:31 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 244463A1978 for <ietf-smtp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 9 Apr 2020 19:31:03 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.1
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 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, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham 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 vBq0n9e0OzFW for <ietf-smtp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 9 Apr 2020 19:31:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mauve.mrochek.com (mauve.mrochek.com [98.153.82.211]) (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 333813A1977 for <ietf-smtp@ietf.org>; Thu, 9 Apr 2020 19:31:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from dkim-sign.mauve.mrochek.com by mauve.mrochek.com (PMDF V6.1-1 #35243) id <01RJIJ9SERRK003MRQ@mauve.mrochek.com> for ietf-smtp@ietf.org; Thu, 9 Apr 2020 19:25:57 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=mrochek.com; s=201712; t=1586485557; bh=aJfgFIYPDK4XWMjBeprP6RkFs+BRx93VeO4nipSklhQ=; h=Cc:Date:From:Subject:In-reply-to:References:To:From; b=KRwfeg8rExMMCcPJqfbGnoBImO0n9YJH/jHU2leEADZ23gbtqohoKHvDObx+qoTHP gkJzVSdl/z/Di6U2S+m+IDYMQQh1gj8UbrZw0Ke68oEaLsOMvlJl26AnJ7vhtZAXet /VCPm3d+tO5GPZb7JxZlzB57VuubJa9aggTfmvN8=
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET="us-ascii"
Received: from mauve.mrochek.com by mauve.mrochek.com (PMDF V6.1-1 #35243) id <01RIHLDFQH34000058@mauve.mrochek.com>; Thu, 9 Apr 2020 19:25:55 -0700 (PDT)
Cc: ietf-smtp@ietf.org, blong@google.com
Message-id: <01RJIJ9QX42K000058@mauve.mrochek.com>
Date: Thu, 09 Apr 2020 19:20:19 -0700
From: Ned Freed <ned.freed@mrochek.com>
In-reply-to: "Your message dated Thu, 09 Apr 2020 19:00:11 -0400" <20200409230011.F039B17637D0@ary.qy>
References: <CABa8R6tyf5DHjL7OpwKo7tQS8a3Gt4oNcib=SvRb=OQuO_id+A@mail.gmail.com> <20200409230011.F039B17637D0@ary.qy>
To: John Levine <johnl@taugh.com>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf-smtp/A-I_H2bisg7WLM-UfSynwsfI_h8>
Subject: Re: [ietf-smtp] SMTP, DSNs, and enhanced replies (was: Re: SMTP server reply extensions)
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: Fri, 10 Apr 2020 02:31:03 -0000

> In article <CABa8R6tyf5DHjL7OpwKo7tQS8a3Gt4oNcib=SvRb=OQuO_id+A@mail.gmail.com> you write:
> >Not positive ones, but negative ones?  I haven't done a survey of whether
> >bounces are typically formatted as DSNs or not, but I thought
> >they were more common now.

> My impression is that these days if you get a bounce it's usually a DSN.

My impression - and (admiteeded limited) data - say so too. That said, I'd
amend that to be "something close to a DSN".
Multipart/report;report-type=delivery-status  yes, but beyond that there can be
a fair bit of noncompliance.

The good news is that there's usually just enough there that an automatic
processor can sort it out.

				Ned

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email