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

E Sam <> Sat, 18 July 2020 18:55 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 834863A0C33 for <>; Sat, 18 Jul 2020 11:55:27 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.848
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.848 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, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=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 (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id bjPwa-Ckpj2o for <>; Sat, 18 Jul 2020 11:55:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::42b]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EE4C53A0C32 for <>; Sat, 18 Jul 2020 11:55:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with SMTP id a6so14229011wrm.4 for <>; Sat, 18 Jul 2020 11:55:25 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=6oysN26qE02fnbZSBMCVaZuRUIe0GC20qerp52y4h2c=; b=gOA4/Uenswc5estjjeZeQlE/kaSQCdeayQwVfULRoRbH8fHcY3lnvGeipnOY385IFQ ArVhlfBHyAiQTx524P8t6IAy9K5WjwM/CrFm0oAu/0WhtlypEQQAtNXiQ5FpjMvINiQL GwqlQT6+bPUMdlkZWeyyE81sX2Sxr392DcSqPNkOcKJyX1qBfcZvKJKvL1BR+R+GLbuf m5DZZ5g7JBPqKlxe3wWEzQ6qmYZI/RNvzco1sZ/8X4Mf6dpG1b1+TJ2ay+txqNbR16Mm g3SMPTfoo1yDHrFprU2SxZzJf7okB5N4wH3CtIfc8tKSqeGHa4y3zLoBjJ0+6ZAwQ3Qi MjQg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=6oysN26qE02fnbZSBMCVaZuRUIe0GC20qerp52y4h2c=; b=l1r3iOzQ1TH9UqVDEYreT4nZ5USaWfEoxO0ejAVQB3H8YbK05QKK1/MG8VFXzCb/n9 9NLGom9HFajTn35ngrLAHLwoHIKTw5Yk706dPQTuE7HRLcZ7N1+zErf0f8bZlpUZWKsO kRXDONu9h+f71hwUtzRkbqV7jpRyqhXxRbYVLhYP5JWrbAjFM3yJU3H6QDPzks2pbo/m Eih4z/HBP+45O6KWuB1lyyTQxKK1DzSrPmXd/WTeh4FV8eKKr6HztsHqX3fZ0H1nM553 dU7KlBy5aN0405kLYregoLh4nXwZpI2TXBE0Bb3UbH0wx9MTI8f4wjU0KVfRUZRo+bnF Vl2A==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532Tpw4rdc3SM/EmEY4w+mErpe3eytk0xIJ1JUCsyk171gD8oypo sXp7fcqJPlxDa83hR7t2xs0HuM4mrlrZ1qUtXdET2g==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJztyaS0eUwmU5/BRcbiHRslf7bsfcF2C/G6gsRKvxQYqSF133FZxAEA9BS3OBiIZHRz+dzRnH/ufI43UAcw4kY=
X-Received: by 2002:a5d:464e:: with SMTP id j14mr15389233wrs.393.1595098524351; Sat, 18 Jul 2020 11:55:24 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <> <52D9A14B4CDD14BB4C97C355@PSB>
In-Reply-To: <52D9A14B4CDD14BB4C97C355@PSB>
From: E Sam <>
Date: Sat, 18 Jul 2020 14:55:13 -0400
Message-ID: <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
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: Sat, 18 Jul 2020 18:55:28 -0000

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