IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [ietf-smtp] Endless debate on IP literals

Dave Crocker <dhc@dcrocker.net> Fri, 03 January 2020 04:19 UTC

Return-Path: <dhc@dcrocker.net>
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 48BA812004E for <ietf-smtp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 2 Jan 2020 20:19:18 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.601
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.601 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 Gxg8DNRvXidU for <ietf-smtp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 2 Jan 2020 20:19:17 -0800 (PST)
Received: from simon.songbird.com (simon.songbird.com [72.52.113.5]) (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 3727612003E for <ietf-smtp@ietf.org>; Thu, 2 Jan 2020 20:19:17 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.1.85] (108-226-162-63.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net [108.226.162.63]) (authenticated bits=0) by simon.songbird.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/Debian-4.1ubuntu1.1) with ESMTP id 0034K9Fd028055 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT); Thu, 2 Jan 2020 20:20:10 -0800
To: Ned Freed <ned.freed@mrochek.com>, Keith Moore <moore@network-heretics.com>
Cc: ietf-smtp@ietf.org
References: <20200101183846.38F7811E2E72@ary.qy> <64f30fa9-ab2a-fe48-f324-426ed48b7091@network-heretics.com> <20200101193816.GP73491@straasha.imrryr.org> <b3f0f5d9-a433-b83a-b032-b726ddd8919a@network-heretics.com> <01RFPO42TK1E000059@mauve.mrochek.com>
Reply-To: dcrocker@bbiw.net
From: Dave Crocker <dhc@dcrocker.net>
Organization: Brandenburg InternetWorking
Message-ID: <9a7b77e2-2921-2fe9-273b-b944d27ae695@dcrocker.net>
Date: Thu, 02 Jan 2020 20:19:11 -0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <01RFPO42TK1E000059@mauve.mrochek.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf-smtp/Hx3CtBmpF1VEd25wooTVVOsgi2c>
Subject: Re: [ietf-smtp] Endless debate on IP literals
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, 03 Jan 2020 04:19:18 -0000

On 1/2/2020 7:30 PM, Ned Freed wrote:
>> p.s. I suspect ietf-smtp doesn't want to dig down into details of how
>> IoT devices should authenticate submissions - at least not just yet -
>> and such a topic might be better discussed in a working group that's
>> specifically tailored to that purpose.   For now I just want people to
>> realize that some long-held assumptions may not be universlaly valid.
> 
> IMO we don't have a choice if we're going to do this correctly.


Knowing nothing about the specifics of this domain, I nonetheless find 
myself wondering...

For MIME, there was infinite debate about what character sets to support 
and how to support them.  After the protracted infinite debate reach 
asymptote, we punted and instead merely specified a place to specify 
whatever character set was being used and a registry for listing known sets.

Any chance a similar approach would be viable here?

d/

-- 
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email