IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [ietf-smtp] why are we reinventing mta-sts ?

Keith Moore <moore@network-heretics.com> Mon, 07 October 2019 20:15 UTC

Return-Path: <moore@network-heretics.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 338A0120046 for <ietf-smtp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 7 Oct 2019 13:15:35 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.598
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_NONE=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.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 dreNDBnk0fOF for <ietf-smtp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 7 Oct 2019 13:15:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from wout3-smtp.messagingengine.com (wout3-smtp.messagingengine.com [64.147.123.19]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 75D80120020 for <ietf-smtp@ietf.org>; Mon, 7 Oct 2019 13:15:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from compute6.internal (compute6.nyi.internal [10.202.2.46]) by mailout.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id BE497548; Mon, 7 Oct 2019 16:15:32 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute6.internal (MEProxy); Mon, 07 Oct 2019 16:15:32 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-proxy :x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; bh=iUQZTb tn3Y9fOW5G/qbjcP1gR9/6erKFt49KGMHW03E=; b=LZ9aBgJmhRJDD2ekzaF1Bh TWyzI9H+MaqLaRnmnsXTAuTbYP8QPQ5VP3dk/wqwPf7V24LW2zp8yAGkz0wok0aj 9RY1koYpBLB3aiKbWIB/TfpzbYURbpYhqUweernaVrBQ+NIDoF60MAkhPyQDhoe0 mLh33uU1q05VADXaKX013ZG5wnaxd/PIhtkDRdciYDs76vysJ+bRCLM0/slKY1N5 k0SPtq/gGj4D2Asc6rAWYPFhJqVR3CmkTXf8fRiO/105l4xvxbng1Ngn7iC1QhuL TwjR84uvaJ6RX3u/l9lPsBC+Il1Or20tfssHezJY84EFh+4aMrkU7kfmrmGnTt1w ==
X-ME-Sender: <xms:5JybXfXmH8E9osnKgeJA1hV47vfZFy_YNf3v8CI1Vxe8saN0xjwzMg>
X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedufedrheejgddufeegucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucenucfjughrpefuvfhfhffkffgfgggjtgesrgdtre ertdefjeenucfhrhhomhepmfgvihhthhcuofhoohhrvgcuoehmohhorhgvsehnvghtfiho rhhkqdhhvghrvghtihgtshdrtghomheqnecukfhppedutdekrddvvddurddukedtrdduhe enucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepmhhoohhrvgesnhgvthifohhrkhdqhhgvrhgv thhitghsrdgtohhmnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptd
X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:5JybXY31yt-NChyw2LRkadWXDRDnUGmDpwJXmzEYfhPmXvtxbeAV7g> <xmx:5JybXQv2opPbDLDrEKeEoH24hCTBgzHdLiGDqny8A2BJOY8aIyzLyQ> <xmx:5JybXYQ2zXC-lE0_M_nRm1BwcMfjFdMx0QnHZ_gjKWpWOwogB-c-qA> <xmx:5JybXbmyR7N-Ob5zVUZoRON9cu8DD44AxWQaaz7GQbiZ7X0cFRZp2w>
Received: from [192.168.1.97] (108-221-180-15.lightspeed.knvltn.sbcglobal.net [108.221.180.15]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id CB2158005B; Mon, 7 Oct 2019 16:15:31 -0400 (EDT)
To: ietf-smtp@ietf.org
References: <20191007002348.GA23742@x2.esmtp.org> <20191007015616.BE113BB3D68@ary.qy> <CANtKdUeC0NVfvVpbHtwd=OoO=BoT8KNWVx8BGF-GPZPU-zo6QA@mail.gmail.com> <CAOEezJTH4Jukz2J4jSDfixECg2Jyyk4+cDnasiAoa4Q2F9=ZZw@mail.gmail.com> <b0dae4ca6e95dc83ca70f71ad780a1432273bcf5.camel@aegee.org> <CAOEezJRXUZkPoJn_kV92q=OQoUs32VzTR5a0JeAKg6NYBW55=Q@mail.gmail.com> <19705.1570469430@turing-police> <f7b9f700-7303-449d-8212-147f29d0bdfd@www.fastmail.com> <CANtKdUcmJDJMm0Vaet23pKBr=yL-jkWXhhr7NtwFvPiJgGwvig@mail.gmail.com>
From: Keith Moore <moore@network-heretics.com>
Message-ID: <8dd17357-2280-f66b-85d0-5dd4650959d5@network-heretics.com>
Date: Mon, 07 Oct 2019 16:15:31 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CANtKdUcmJDJMm0Vaet23pKBr=yL-jkWXhhr7NtwFvPiJgGwvig@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------52AD9484C8AF6DD64FE3B642"
Content-Language: en-US
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf-smtp/KgrHinec1wE0v29U48UQsKWJdp4>
Subject: Re: [ietf-smtp] why are we reinventing mta-sts ?
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: Mon, 07 Oct 2019 20:15:35 -0000

On 10/7/19 4:04 PM, Daniel Margolis wrote:

> But I don't fully understand the scenario where it's//a significant 
> economic burden beyond the basic cost of hosting an MTA.

Not that I disagree with you, but IMO the cost of all of these is too 
high.   In my part of the world it has unfortunately become conventional 
wisdom that public-facing services should be "outsourced", and too many 
people have forgotten that this was once unnecessary for services that 
did not see significant demand.   So I don't think the cost of hosting 
an MTA is nearly low enough and I am supportive of efforts to reduce it.

Keith

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email