IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

Dave Crocker <dhc@dcrocker.net> Wed, 01 January 2020 01:54 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 A5023120077 for <ietf-smtp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 31 Dec 2019 17:54:03 -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 SBDM4lKQHcG3 for <ietf-smtp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 31 Dec 2019 17:54:02 -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 661CC120072 for <ietf-smtp@ietf.org>; Tue, 31 Dec 2019 17:54:02 -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 0011srG6015402 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT); Tue, 31 Dec 2019 17:54:54 -0800
To: John R Levine <johnl@taugh.com>, John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com>
Cc: ietf-smtp@ietf.org
References: <20191231185722.B47A411DDA7C@ary.qy> <357D24576FFBC2C56FE0FF07@JcK-HP5.jck.com> <alpine.OSX.2.21.99999.374.1912312028080.51207@ary.qy>
Reply-To: dcrocker@bbiw.net
From: Dave Crocker <dhc@dcrocker.net>
Organization: Brandenburg InternetWorking
Message-ID: <17369560-c9ea-56c7-33bf-a0a5a801ec54@dcrocker.net>
Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2019 17:53:55 -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: <alpine.OSX.2.21.99999.374.1912312028080.51207@ary.qy>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf-smtp/IZXTkAEIrcrcR80l3MgjUWURMpA>
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: Wed, 01 Jan 2020 01:54:04 -0000

On 12/31/2019 5:28 PM, John R Levine wrote:
> With a clearer split between SMTP and submission, that seems sensible. 
> Submission can excuse all sorts of antique stuff that SMTP wouldn't.


Given that there has already been a vigorous effort to demand much more 
stringent (security-related) efforts in the operation of MTAs, it's 
certainly worth considering application of that demand to this revision 
effort.

The question should be what the driving criteria are.  The follow-on 
question will be how to apply them, of course.

Over the last week, I've found myself increasingly thinking that an 
effort to simplify and focus the document, as much as possible, would be 
especially helpful, notably distinguishing more general email 'systems' 
discussion from the specific transfer functionality that is SMTP's domain.

d/
-- 
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email