IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [ietf-smtp] Possible cont4ibution to moving forward with RFC5321bis SMTP

Dave Crocker <dhc@dcrocker.net> Thu, 02 January 2020 20:48 UTC

Return-Path: <dhc@dcrocker.net>
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 EA9F3120137 for <ietf-smtp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 2 Jan 2020 12:48:16 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.6
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 M12Rec_K1NWI for <ietf-smtp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 2 Jan 2020 12:48:15 -0800 (PST)
Received: from simon.songbird.com (simon.songbird.com [72.52.113.5]) (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 CE06412004D for <ietf-smtp@ietf.org>; Thu, 2 Jan 2020 12:48:15 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.1.85] (108-226-162-63.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net [108.226.162.63]) (authenticated bits=0) by simon.songbird.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/Debian-4.1ubuntu1.1) with ESMTP id 002Kn7Jk001250 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT); Thu, 2 Jan 2020 12:49:08 -0800
To: Keith Moore <moore@network-heretics.com>, ietf-smtp@ietf.org
References: <20191230013034.2C3E111D376E@ary.qy> <f894c448-ac91-6d27-98d6-0803de4ea535@network-heretics.com> <alpine.OSX.2.21.99999.374.1912292129450.44159@ary.qy> <d3dc48b0-332b-c2fe-704a-d6dc69eb5424@network-heretics.com> <5E0B8658.2060703@isdg.net> <fc8d4d71-39a4-6ca0-608a-d2113b206c5f@network-heretics.com> <5E0E10AF.30808@isdg.net> <3a106d9d-7be9-f6d4-b6e6-0103372ae227@network-heretics.com> <de71c2ed-adb6-7cf7-8f6b-a933677dc89f@dcrocker.net> <ddad210b-90b7-1e51-281f-5fcca6c31ac0@network-heretics.com> <ce552773-c8d9-28a4-040d-7efad31fa51b@dcrocker.net> <260da20f-454c-2368-c9c4-02e5a94b9c7b@network-heretics.com> <551b5e2d-4978-16b2-6e01-e0232fa52d99@dcrocker.net> <c84024a2-001f-908a-cdf4-a5e3a5d795e4@network-heretics.com>
Reply-To: dcrocker@bbiw.net
From: Dave Crocker <dhc@dcrocker.net>
Organization: Brandenburg InternetWorking
Message-ID: <d5fdaa28-50e8-a976-8b0c-bc968a94c6a6@dcrocker.net>
Date: Thu, 02 Jan 2020 12:48:08 -0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <c84024a2-001f-908a-cdf4-a5e3a5d795e4@network-heretics.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf-smtp/xaicB-8qBo10TSYEAgBCLge31fM>
Subject: Re: [ietf-smtp] Possible cont4ibution to moving forward with RFC5321bis SMTP
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, 02 Jan 2020 20:48:17 -0000

On 1/2/2020 12:30 PM, Keith Moore wrote:
> But we're not always clear about when we're talking about an 
> abstraction, vs. when we're using one of these terms to talk about an 
> implementation or a service.


The established terms are actually rather precise and refer to the 
networking abstraction, not an implementation.

d/

-- 
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email