Re: [ietf-smtp] Proposed agenda for EMAILCORE BOF

Keith Moore <> Thu, 23 July 2020 17:35 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2334F3A0C88 for <>; Thu, 23 Jul 2020 10:35:03 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.918
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.918 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_NONE=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 YO1ZoXgTOquE for <>; Thu, 23 Jul 2020 10:35:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 18D503A0C81 for <>; Thu, 23 Jul 2020 10:35:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from compute4.internal (compute4.nyi.internal []) by mailout.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2A33C11EA for <>; Thu, 23 Jul 2020 13:35:00 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from mailfrontend2 ([]) by compute4.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 23 Jul 2020 13:35:00 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=; h=content-transfer-encoding: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=fm3; bh=3BqTD3PJVOCM7OBqc6ZQFwb37VsUuYfYZ1/hf9up0 PE=; b=sgrhrIDa2a6Ut6QLdkJA4l/ki5RdMQYoY09/IQjXTjkj5GU+rqmkOwb86 jUAdSYq6to89Dd8Zz+okJq9wp9F3oRhie8sS0awx8+BE/lwP6uX7OzGz1E0dt9IE 7ZrZAQQXipdxbe44w2CFsMtiiKTPOiVuLStfMWW9Y41gXDgzYFfGX75hq8EjqRc/ 3KMVA3WBXGnPlVzc06L0wdYMCrMGi/xdtCSB4vBLfMlkIzd9DEzHRR+fwf6yQ+r6 9Hp+GqIhU1CveWUHo1/BWI77EfzoEE96Dva/6XkBqP5f33qj4pidgbOBBlu/CERm J8/ArRgq5zrGwWEotcBHxtWaHp0Aw==
X-ME-Sender: <xms:Q8oZX1e394zx_CggI91QEQ9njQ17EKSMDKSLWR6SXHc31urPDa2NqA>
X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduiedrhedugdduudekucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucenucfjughrpefuvfhfhffkffgfgggjtgfgsehtke ertddtfeejnecuhfhrohhmpefmvghithhhucfoohhorhgvuceomhhoohhrvgesnhgvthif ohhrkhdqhhgvrhgvthhitghsrdgtohhmqeenucggtffrrghtthgvrhhnpeehhfeutdehfe fgfefghfekhefguefgieduueegjeekfeelleeuieffteefueduueenucfkphepuddtkedr vddvuddrudektddrudehnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrg hilhhfrhhomhepmhhoohhrvgesnhgvthifohhrkhdqhhgvrhgvthhitghsrdgtohhm
X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:Q8oZXzNWW1LP3njpPqQ6XH_bXn2sEMmmi8s1NJKx0GAQ4cKTM4LwAA> <xmx:Q8oZX-jducjk5OrUu9EdHVYB5A9bI2unoDJn80k0ZyrY-Da403SCVA> <xmx:Q8oZX-9XRXv0NGfXqNlYUMHuSH2XWL5p4p6FmxoLBFX8-qa_1rueNA> <xmx:Q8oZX4Ps_rxs2NUExaK-dKN4QFHj2mn_uSE1Sz9KFawTghUlYb2yaQ>
Received: from [] ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 1123D306005F for <>; Thu, 23 Jul 2020 13:34:59 -0400 (EDT)
References: <> <> <> <> <20615.1595518705@localhost> <> <>
From: Keith Moore <>
Message-ID: <>
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2020 13:34:58 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.10.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Language: en-US
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [ietf-smtp] Proposed agenda for EMAILCORE BOF
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: Thu, 23 Jul 2020 17:35:03 -0000

On 7/23/20 1:14 PM, Michael Peddemors wrote:

>>> Would you include DMARC, and the new list-friendly version, of which 
>>> I know
>>> little?
>> My strong preference would be to include none of these, and only SMTP 
>> and MIME specifications.
>> Keith
> If you limit to SMTP and MIME, this isn't really 'email core'.
> Including IMAP and possibly others, should be encouraged.

I disagree, and for what it's worth, that's not what I had understood 
the intent of the group to be.

If it's necessary to change the name of the group to minimize confusion, 
so be it.

I believe that a tight focus is essential for most working groups, and 
especially so for a group that's tasked with moving a set of mature 
documents to Full Standard.   I don't think such a group should be used 
to bless potentially every email protocol in use, as IMO they vary a 
great deal in both quality and long-term applicability.   I think such a 
group could easily slide down a slippery slope into a huge rathole.

But it does seem like a scope discussion might be a good use of BOF 
time, assuming the ADs are willing at all to entertain the idea of 
making EMAILCORE wider in scope than just SMTP and MIME.