Re: [ietf-smtp] parsing SMTP replies

Laura Atkins <laura@wordtothewise.com> Fri, 19 March 2021 08:55 UTC

Return-Path: <laura@wordtothewise.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 C243B3A179F for <ietf-smtp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 19 Mar 2021 01:55:33 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.098
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 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, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=wordtothewise.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 RJ7vcujjgpyo for <ietf-smtp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 19 Mar 2021 01:55:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.wordtothewise.com (mail.wordtothewise.com [104.225.223.158]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E43DD3A17A0 for <ietf-smtp@ietf.org>; Fri, 19 Mar 2021 01:55:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.0.227] (unknown [37.228.231.27]) by mail.wordtothewise.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id EAECD9F149 for <ietf-smtp@ietf.org>; Fri, 19 Mar 2021 01:55:30 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=wordtothewise.com; s=aardvark; t=1616144131; bh=ICJnSNt/ATWWleqDVWtfWzI9yjhOXmTwp5kIK41WSKo=; h=From:Subject:Date:References:To:In-Reply-To:From; b=O+PBOTxiJTeHgPGN/Q9Cy6N0wRn4uRlgWWtpc0dX+xQRwhQbfaC4AHUxZOWGvS/IQ 2I3wrr5aA+X2PocdNCFiev0JEHgsmo/l1Hy63CX94e3T0abnkiydFqPKJe7rp91ZcH fdZ8jBhosOMIN5efISVfr9V4j5ExRAZSUG77YWro=
From: Laura Atkins <laura@wordtothewise.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_15FD7C48-E5C2-4C7F-BCA6-DDA0092C1CD3"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.4\))
Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2021 08:55:29 +0000
References: <CF0247A810AF9482CBB155E8@PSB> <01RWP85B98S4005PTU@mauve.mrochek.com> <20210316061139.GA26514@kiel.esmtp.org> <0d5912b5-6aba-728b-00de-a75397ad8ad8@tana.it> <01RWRTQUWB8Q005PTU@mauve.mrochek.com> <4EC92B6CFDD4220E0F692CF0@PSB> <cone.1616031446.909688.90196.1004@monster.email-scan.com> <7d448367-d5a0-7baf-3df4-dcafe1859437@network-heretics.com> <1B7BC0D7-5D34-4688-9D8A-BEA925D0ACCD@dukhovni.org> <7aaaef02-bcdb-dbac-530e-580693a10cd7@linuxmagic.com> <YFPbCG/VA86H5iyi@straasha.imrryr.org> <7b9a865d-435d-55cc-7a8a-c7d984296b15@linuxmagic.com> <a82d482d-0c4e-281e-49a5-6cd68cac51e7@wizmail.org>
To: ietf-smtp@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <a82d482d-0c4e-281e-49a5-6cd68cac51e7@wizmail.org>
Message-Id: <032A2CA7-E1CC-412F-BEF6-96981784FB05@wordtothewise.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.4)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf-smtp/ZWEUEOATWTwgbaDFgWa4_iVT3p0>
Subject: Re: [ietf-smtp] parsing SMTP replies
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: Fri, 19 Mar 2021 08:55:34 -0000


> On 18 Mar 2021, at 23:27, Jeremy Harris <jgh@wizmail.org> wrote:
> 
> On 18/03/2021 23:15, Michael Peddemors wrote:
>> If you show me MTA's currently advertising limits on how much they accept, then it may be something that needs to be addressed.
> 
> Apart from people building prototypes to demo this proposal, there are no
> such MTAs precisely because there is no standard to do so.

The MTAs aren’t advertising limits, but the companies running the MTAs do set limits on senders. There’s just no programatic way to advertise them.

Yahoo: limits connections, also limits the number of emails per connection and will just close connections after that limit has been reached. 

Gmail: prefers fewer connections and as much mail shoved through it as possible. 

Microsoft: admits there is a limit to connections, but does not make that public. 

Modern bulk MTAs have built in controls so these limits can be manually configured. They also have AI / ML / automatic processes that will modify sending behavior on the fly. These can be per MX, IP, MX cluster, or whatever. 

These things are happening already (and have been for a decade) they’re just not standardized. 

laura 

> 
> 
>> Either way, it seems like the wrong time/place to put in standards for a need that is not yet apparent.
> 
> The need is for a more efficient, in roundtrips, way of communicating limits
> than getting individual command responses.
> -- 
> Cheers,
>  Jeremy
> 
> _______________________________________________
> ietf-smtp mailing list
> ietf-smtp@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-smtp

-- 
Having an Email Crisis?  We can help! 800 823-9674 

Laura Atkins
Word to the Wise
laura@wordtothewise.com
(650) 437-0741		

Email Delivery Blog: https://wordtothewise.com/blog