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

Alexey Melnikov <alexey.melnikov@isode.com> Fri, 24 July 2020 13:35 UTC

Return-Path: <alexey.melnikov@isode.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 1575F3A08A6 for <ietf-smtp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 24 Jul 2020 06:35:36 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.1
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 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, NICE_REPLY_A=-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=isode.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 0mq4Ide36yG6 for <ietf-smtp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 24 Jul 2020 06:35:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from waldorf.isode.com (waldorf.isode.com [62.232.206.188]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC4703A0AFA for <ietf-smtp@ietf.org>; Fri, 24 Jul 2020 06:35:34 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1595597734; d=isode.com; s=june2016; i=@isode.com; bh=3uIdFijfdl/QAAu1wpWlf6h3uBqM4BQ2wBWc9TBkLD4=; h=From:Sender:Reply-To:Subject:Date:Message-ID:To:Cc:MIME-Version: In-Reply-To:References:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-ID:Content-Description; b=hwwKQsE7TR7l9RgwiDUfDwW16MVX0Wh7qj1wmDrQzPwPd2uAzFUDP+WinFJE52tJ44i6Kq mKaV/5B8oQz3DkT9QwmJ0Bh+fPWBC+IBq+dz5lY6HI64/sTvDOpRQL87YYsUag3oW8lOEf 1wnPX8lb7YOuV85Xah9P5LafFqJyULM=;
Received: from [172.22.22.143] ((unknown) [172.22.22.143]) by waldorf.isode.com (submission channel) via TCP with ESMTPSA id <XxrjpQAkBmLa@waldorf.isode.com>; Fri, 24 Jul 2020 14:35:33 +0100
X-SMTP-Protocol-Errors: NORDNS
To: Keith Moore <moore@network-heretics.com>, ietf-smtp@ietf.org
References: <579f408c-ed7e-9dbe-f626-f0dab2380d13@isode.com> <3b8e5d41-1b61-ca9e-f257-792d3d0f0f6e@dcrocker.net> <a9915d28-8a32-e5d4-daee-6b32775030f5@isode.com> <795414fd-839f-aca4-0a6b-1924e293d437@network-heretics.com>
From: Alexey Melnikov <alexey.melnikov@isode.com>
Message-ID: <c5e66b34-8981-0e6b-0e9e-78c6f46ecc8f@isode.com>
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2020 14:35:33 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.10.0
In-Reply-To: <795414fd-839f-aca4-0a6b-1924e293d437@network-heretics.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Language: en-GB
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf-smtp/y7pk0zkIc-KsLxybE7WpDYHT8zc>
Subject: Re: [ietf-smtp] Proposed agenda for EMAILCORE BOF
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, 24 Jul 2020 13:35:36 -0000

Hi Keith,

On 23/07/2020 05:14, Keith Moore wrote:
> I would like it to be clarified as to whether the purpose of the BOF 
> is to bash the charter for the proposed EMAILCORE WG.
>
> If the purpose of the EMAILCORE WG is indeed to bring the current 
> message format and SMTP specifications to Full Standard,
Yes.
> I further propose that any features not in those specifications should 
> be out-of-scope for the WG, unless perhaps any new features are (a) 
> already at Proposed Standard; (b) widely implemented enough to also be 
> considered for Full Standard; and (c) necessary for inclusion in the 
> core specifications in order for the complete set of revised 
> specifications (core + new features) to qualify for Full Standard.

I think you are basically making the same comment as John.

> (I suppose if someone wants to make a case that the core email 
> specifications are not suitable for advancement to Full Standard but 
> instead should be recycled at Proposed, while the charter is being 
> bashed would also be the time to make that argument.)
>
> I would therefore propose that any features that don't meet those 
> criteria either be ruled out-of-scope for the BOF, at least deferred 
> until the WG charter has been bashed. 
Yes, we will have a change to discuss this when discussing the proposed 
charter.
> Perhaps if there's time remaining it would make sense to use that time 
> to discuss features that couldn't be taken up by the working group.
>
> What I don't think makes any sense at all, at least given the current 
> IETF standards process, is to combine a discussion of adding new 
> features, with a discussion of advancement to Full Standard.

Agreed.

Best Regards,

Alexey