IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [ietf-smtp] [Proposal] confusing parts of the mail system, was 250-MARKDOWN

Paul Smith <paul@pscs.co.uk> Thu, 17 January 2019 09:31 UTC

Return-Path: <paul@pscs.co.uk>
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 117FF12F1AC for <ietf-smtp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 17 Jan 2019 01:31:21 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.701
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.701 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=pscs.co.uk
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 HvYt9kOoI1y9 for <ietf-smtp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 17 Jan 2019 01:31:18 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.pscs.co.uk (mail.pscs.co.uk [195.224.19.137]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3BA1F128B14 for <ietf-smtp@ietf.org>; Thu, 17 Jan 2019 01:31:17 -0800 (PST)
Authentication-Results: mail.pscs.co.uk; spf=none; auth=pass (cram-md5) smtp.auth=pscs
Received: from lmail.pscs.co.uk ([192.168.66.70]) by mail.pscs.co.uk ([10.224.19.137] running VPOP3) with ESMTPSA for <ietf-smtp@ietf.org>; Thu, 17 Jan 2019 09:31:14 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=pscs.co.uk; q=dns/txt; s=lmail; h=From:Subject:To:References:Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:In-Reply-To :Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Cc:Reply-to:Sender; t=1547717095; x=1548321895; bh=z085b7YwA4vjgJvgCQQ/mne5AoZZ1vLr/wMLfIRh8LA=; b=ipc0OxSL0W/J54YwgMiesHud1XkZoomtXJCxJmST5huD7ZJuTUEb+QCFuWITt5o4orK29LIM 7movfn3kI+CfgX8mCDA+1BUr/UXEgmhMjhArCVCXAe4qk2soqvMT1aRu6Tdk9Cog9cTtjrL7dI YjXFHj5U9MwYPUvomaAnbe4uI=
Authentication-Results: lmail.pscs.co.uk; spf=none; auth=pass (cram-md5) smtp.auth=paul
Received: from [192.168.66.100] ([192.168.66.100]) by lmail.pscs.co.uk ([192.168.66.70] running VPOP3) with ESMTPSA (TLSv1.2 ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384) for <ietf-smtp@ietf.org>; Thu, 17 Jan 2019 09:24:53 -0000
From: Paul Smith <paul@pscs.co.uk>
To: ietf-smtp@ietf.org
References: <CAOEezJTxTN9x_JFXgLidj9k8NVgFTRyqyQc4Aak8UEQuvjiM0w@mail.gmail.com> <20190109143529.33122200C76CAD@ary.local> <460d4589-5517-3762-5764-7474523dd09b@digilicious.com> <01R1U95VCAHI00004L@mauve.mrochek.com> <74e22977-8ee8-c762-4882-b56e5911430e@digilicious.com> <CALui8C2qzp_jBo=YHA+XXBGF6+jigDeEaX24L2bohQBdaXKHwg@mail.gmail.com> <2ea48fe6-eb48-02e1-d3e2-53782f3ff758@digilicious.com> <alpine.OSX.2.21.1901111607320.22582@ary.qy> <bcf3958d-cd42-fc3c-57fc-56a5f8394b37@digilicious.com> <alpine.OSX.2.21.1901111647330.22750@ary.qy> <5b6ddc8f-9c53-df04-0f61-721fad0972f3@digilicious.com> <CALui8C3934HTxrY-JGB3rAu1dX1z8oz1AK8jmZLsZQhSuxDszw@mail.gmail.com> <01R238XJND6O00004L@mauve.mrochek.com> <65cc0784-a8f0-e40e-c5d9-c736ee1081ea@digilicious.com>
Message-ID: <e63c8c15-8604-676d-e14b-5f08715ced73@pscs.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2019 09:24:53 +0000
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <65cc0784-a8f0-e40e-c5d9-c736ee1081ea@digilicious.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Language: en-GB
X-Authenticated-Sender: paul
X-Server: VPOP3 Enterprise V7.9 - Registered
X-Organisation: Paul Smith Computer Services
X-VPOP3Tester: 12 345
X-Authenticated-Sender: pscs
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf-smtp/j5gdF52SRl5OI5vrgmPmYHYX_VE>
Subject: Re: [ietf-smtp] [Proposal] confusing parts of the mail system, was 250-MARKDOWN
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: Thu, 17 Jan 2019 09:31:21 -0000

On 17/01/2019 03:31, Gene Hightower wrote:
> Microsoft, for their hotmail.com service anyway, does support
> BINARYMIME for received mail. And, as far as I can tell, it works.

> Strangely, when Microsoft sends mail they don't seem to use BINARYMIME
> even though I offer the extension.
>
To be honest, I'd think BINARYMIME would be easy to implement on a final 
delivery SMTP server (as you KNOW what's downstream from you, and that 
they won't need to recode the message).

However, on the outgoing part of a submission server (or on an 
intermediate MTA), it's a lot more tricky, as you don't know what you 
may be sending to and whether it'll need recoding.

So, that's quite possibly why Microsoft accept it on incoming, but don't 
use it on outgoing. Seems sensible to me.



-- 


Paul Smith Computer Services
Tel: 01484 855800
Vat No: GB 685 6987 53

Sign up for news & updates at http://www.pscs.co.uk/go/subscribe

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email