Re: [ietf-smtp] Curious, with this now being associated to emailcore, should list name change?

Alexey Melnikov <> Wed, 22 July 2020 12:31 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 711CA3A0B15 for <>; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 05:31:57 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.1
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, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 6pui4SXaTkh8 for <>; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 05:31:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id D53083A0B0C for <>; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 05:31:55 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1595421115;; s=june2016;; bh=5NoD5NtO4XXKYjtPqYgw1O2ujpxrWmN5DYaAYS1saIs=; h=From:Sender:Reply-To:Subject:Date:Message-ID:To:Cc:MIME-Version: In-Reply-To:References:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-ID:Content-Description; b=Lwo4ChUtlUfLnHKUYwbQHJ5k/1chuSo6VbJD6hsnYDKQwdFUeJeIQDnDjMD0utmTAVh9pW YsYbNi0jznr8b8iOQAEsp+3Cb+ApfJw9dl1nKl71y536HSw2FRE4Uu9/hXognVOA8vOn52 /YdfcMDvyzxhwLU1Wn8XgCFUCGvACxc=;
Received: from [] ( []) by (submission channel) via TCP with ESMTPSA id <>; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 13:31:54 +0100
To: John C Klensin <>, E Sam <>
References: <> <52D9A14B4CDD14BB4C97C355@PSB> <> <DE8B2C33275660E19FFA513C@PSB>
From: Alexey Melnikov <>
Message-ID: <>
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2020 13:31:38 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.9.0
In-Reply-To: <DE8B2C33275660E19FFA513C@PSB>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Language: en-GB
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [ietf-smtp] Curious, with this now being associated to emailcore, should list name change?
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Discussion of issues related to Simple Mail Transfer Protocol \(SMTP\) \[RFC 821, RFC 2821, RFC 5321\]" <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2020 12:31:57 -0000

On 18/07/2020 20:15, John C Klensin wrote:

> You may want to have a look at the draft agenda, now posted at

Thank you for the introduction, John.

The above was updated a bit:

> and noting that the example topics for rfc5321bis are references
> to Appendix G of draft-klensin-rfc5321bis-03 (the agenda sort of
> says that, but, IMO, it is easy to miss).  It is vaguely
> possible that a new version of the I-D will be posted before the
> BOF meets, but it is thoroughly unlikely that Appendix
> names/numbers will change.
> Alexey or Seth may be able to add to that, especially if you
> have specific questions.
I don't have much to add at this point. Seth and I will send the 
conference call link for the BOF once we know it.
> Beyond the agenda, "emailcore" seems to be a title or framework
> for a lot of different ideas that may not have focused or
> converged yet.  The purpose of a BOF is to move that process
> along.
> best,
>    john
> --On Saturday, July 18, 2020 14:55 -0400 E Sam
> <> wrote:
>> Hello all,
>> I'm out of the loop of the plans for the (future?) emailcore
>> working group
>> Any links where I can catch up and read more about this before
>> the IETF 108 meeting (if I can make it of course)
>> YES i DuckDuckGoed some information about it but I am still
>> out of the loop a little bit
>> Thank you all
>> On Fri, Jul 17, 2020 at 6:13 PM John C Klensin
>> <> wrote:
>>> --On Friday, July 17, 2020 14:57 -0700 Michael Peddemors
>>> <> wrote:
>>>> Not sure what normally happens, but it might be confusing.
>>> Independent of "normal", the name and mailing address of this
>>> list is known by email developers and operators all over the
>>> Internet.  It also consolidates some prior lists specifically
>>> associated with mail headers, MIME, and non-ASCII addresses
>>> and headers (and maybe others, probably including the lists
>>> for the DRUMS and YAM WGs).   Changing its name (effectively
>>> killing the list and starting another) would be disruptive in
>>> the extreme.
>>> Perhaps "emailcore" should be given a list of its own, but I
>>> think that would not be helpful either.
>>>> "Email Core" would have a wider scope, and it might be
>>>> confusing if the list name was limited to 'smtp'.
>>> Consider it a historical artifact and, like WG names (and
>>> corresponding mailing list) that are chosen more for cuteness
>>> than actual semantic value, accept it and move forward.
>>> Please.
>>> I will leave it to the BOF Chairs and/or ADs to comment on the
>>> rest of this but my understanding is that they want to keep
>>> the scope of "emailcore" as narrow as possible, at least
>>> initially, rather than having it expand into "any email topic
>>> that would be worth addressing".
>>> Speaking only for myself, I note that the IETF has tried very
>>> hard over the years to stay out of MUA design and issues.
>>> Perhaps it is time to change that and take on at least some
>>> MUA requirements (work is badly needed, IMO, in the non-ASCII
>>> addresses and header space although I don't know if the IETF
>>> as the right expertise to do it) but it would be a rather
>>> large step.
>>>> Suggestion for topic for this group as well:
>>>> Unifying all the 'autodiscover' and 'autoconfig' methods
>>>> currently in place.. email client developers have now a very
>>>> convoluted set of requirements in order to find the
>>>> 'recommended' settings for that domain or ISP etc..
>>>> There are several independent databases out there, eg
>>>> Apple's own, the ISPDB, and even some of Microsofts' own
>>>> email clients no longer follow traditional methods of
>>>> lookups.. It is a bit of a mess, that maybe the IETF would
>>>> like to weigh in on?
>>> best,
>>>     john
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> ietf-smtp mailing list
>> _______________________________________________
>> ietf-smtp mailing list
> _______________________________________________
> ietf-smtp mailing list