IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

John Bucy <jbucy@google.com> Thu, 10 January 2019 19:56 UTC

Return-Path: <jbucy@google.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 812DF130F88 for <ietf-smtp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 10 Jan 2019 11:56:08 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -17.641
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-17.641 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_MED=-0.142, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, ENV_AND_HDR_SPF_MATCH=-0.5, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5, USER_IN_DEF_SPF_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=google.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 bZnHhA36sXbP for <ietf-smtp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 10 Jan 2019 11:56:07 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-ed1-x534.google.com (mail-ed1-x534.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::534]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 10BBC130F6D for <ietf-smtp@ietf.org>; Thu, 10 Jan 2019 11:56:07 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-ed1-x534.google.com with SMTP id d39so11177180edb.12 for <ietf-smtp@ietf.org>; Thu, 10 Jan 2019 11:56:06 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=gcoHWgrEnCa26oCIGDdgXeBDaDG9+PbDA3NJ+L9Pl2c=; b=At/GKkEvpx1K5D+E9BGQMjT5PHeCV8zDCDiL+qb/cmbgDTbAuLrEsPdVNGJsoyrni/ YyOvWfV8gNhpzDtF0Yn1UWeUqOQaV59UvtJ1gjw3IumVywKObQbesPkkHaO/N9Apzm/A dMHe1BRz6eJbMPEM1+WgJ3zStS79p/+4f6M6Z5Ppp9IbWvvyBuX+uysEmAlgO4tU1QCj i9kzDObMREVeTKZpQEoVbpFa+osbRqpXxYpDbL1+sL9EwtJu48EZ8qhzQHCLFkrKWH0a pUewMEvpOrb4ArFaY9QXRMZ33Y97ntEdnUt4lFwYq5dICds9qpE92H3y/6KLI8H5OwyG pPKg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=gcoHWgrEnCa26oCIGDdgXeBDaDG9+PbDA3NJ+L9Pl2c=; b=OlaEgr95hgavZPZBTOfoCIGQwT3sBB9we99AusB7sf4hDbByTWdC3omZSEiLHblAwR Fh0WafWckq3f7UzDDh5eilALrHgN2gk7Q1jdwnWeFs+O0/4cgTidLvFlsZb+2/kmXQM/ FWUczUxVoT1kffolQa5BBM9gNdw8d7EeX1E9+ozXDyz/+gJsfJr7ADrpEM6HerLGkeiw NXfJc7lH1suN0fi8taS8UT38bvOLIHUKhP9ITpfzL+WnJosnLfTYsdPsmX9fMJURawdV Xxo5yDZXeFOsmtbHBq+hhKTYnHG9NkycQR1mQK9Q/0Ykzp5dbGgyWGk7OseUEgedBfYj 9OhQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AJcUukdMi2OsDcT3J5XfDE1PGn1BNkuUPHCQxMAqC+6PCmrM34XJqgew sMbGy3xueKGuEs2nvTkELCU0E+u2a7Y/9CCniaMwlQZcLFw=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ALg8bN5Zte6wEnJo6S8L9Fv+/K5o7/oFCiTQFD7amoPcWpB0hbyQQQWIQClhnaKFUImt8ISQhGnK2fSlYE7s0tpLQAo=
X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:6690:: with SMTP id z16-v6mr9415216ejo.142.1547150165429; Thu, 10 Jan 2019 11:56:05 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
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>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.OSX.2.21.1901101442230.18680@ary.qy>
From: John Bucy <jbucy@google.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2019 11:55:53 -0800
Message-ID: <CALui8C1FHhq0Bc1GOXe1xQ+w5c7td3BuOEhBmB6Jf0DZbXLYXw@mail.gmail.com>
To: John R Levine <johnl@taugh.com>
Cc: ietf-smtp <ietf-smtp@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000006db63057f1ff899"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf-smtp/DotIy9rW37i57YyDWjF-cZUE-U4>
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: Thu, 10 Jan 2019 19:56:08 -0000

On Thu, Jan 10, 2019 at 11:48 AM John R Levine <johnl@taugh.com> wrote:

> On Thu, 10 Jan 2019, John Bucy wrote:
> >> Question is, is BINARYMIME doable?  Or a lost cause?
> >
> > As I see it, the problem is a message getting stuck "in the middle" where
> > the next hop doesn't support the extension e.g. user has a .forward file.
>
> For systems that have separate MUA and MTA, the MUA has no way to tell
> whether a downstream recipient will support BINARYMIME


The MSA could call ahead/cut-through, doesn't exim do that? That might also
allow for the mua to throw an error ui at the user if they fat-fingered the
recipient rather than getting a bounce back later.



cheers
john

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email