IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [IAB] [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- considered harmful

Christian Huitema <huitema@huitema.net> Tue, 07 May 2019 21:33 UTC

Return-Path: <huitema@huitema.net>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A72712027D for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 7 May 2019 14:33:09 -0700 (PDT)
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=unavailable 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 J5yTQgndD8Bq for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 7 May 2019 14:33:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx36-out10.antispamcloud.com (mx36-out10.antispamcloud.com [209.126.121.30]) (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 3431F120256 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 7 May 2019 14:33:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from xsmtp02.mail2web.com ([168.144.250.215]) by mx105.antispamcloud.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from <huitema@huitema.net>) id 1hO7hs-0009pr-OU for ietf@ietf.org; Tue, 07 May 2019 23:33:05 +0200
Received: from [10.5.2.35] (helo=xmail10.myhosting.com) by xsmtp02.mail2web.com with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from <huitema@huitema.net>) id 1hO7hb-0003Ig-Rx for ietf@ietf.org; Tue, 07 May 2019 17:32:45 -0400
Received: (qmail 8395 invoked from network); 7 May 2019 21:32:39 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO [IPv6:2607:fb90:f7c:81f2:6899:3fab:5dff:7560]) (Authenticated-user:_huitema@huitema.net@[172.58.41.69]) (envelope-sender <huitema@huitema.net>) by xmail10.myhosting.com (qmail-ldap-1.03) with ESMTPA for <iesg@ietf.org>; 7 May 2019 21:32:39 -0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
From: Christian Huitema <huitema@huitema.net>
X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (16E227)
In-Reply-To: <53a9c16c-163c-a18a-371a-f8aa8697af15@cs.tcd.ie>
Date: Tue, 07 May 2019 14:32:38 -0700
Cc: Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org>, "BRUNGARD, DEBORAH A" <db3546@att.com>, "iab@iab.org" <iab@iab.org>, "ietf@ietf.org" <ietf@ietf.org>, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, "architecture-discuss@ietf.org" <architecture-discuss@ietf.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <4E87C376-0E54-4EA6-8AF8-B1C92F852226@huitema.net>
References: <F64C10EAA68C8044B33656FA214632C89F024CD3@MISOUT7MSGUSRDE.ITServices.sbc.com> <CALaySJJDHg5j9Z7+noS=YXoNROqdsbJ6coEECtLtbJ6fWJ3xsQ@mail.gmail.com> <53a9c16c-163c-a18a-371a-f8aa8697af15@cs.tcd.ie>
To: Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
Subject: Re: [IAB] [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- considered harmful
X-Originating-IP: 168.144.250.215
X-Spampanel-Domain: xsmtpout.mail2web.com
X-Spampanel-Username: 168.144.250.0/24
Authentication-Results: antispamcloud.com; auth=pass smtp.auth=168.144.250.0/24@xsmtpout.mail2web.com
X-Spampanel-Outgoing-Class: unsure
X-Spampanel-Outgoing-Evidence: Combined (0.15)
X-Recommended-Action: accept
X-Filter-ID: Mvzo4OR0dZXEDF/gcnlw0R4iIUvzjp5U0k+OHPPhRGapSDasLI4SayDByyq9LIhVUZbR67CQ7/vm /hHDJU4RXkTNWdUk1Ol2OGx3IfrIJKywOmJyM1qr8uRnWBrbSAGDAzc5Jb/eaE0k3pqeq35lKbgN zB/4Jkrw1eDLcif59fuZPlP8DQxJcdftfRgzoCsL/sevPPdLVvjz7b14RFNIS87+5mCGQbZOG2a6 XRF1Gc0bQoXoeQu5aLx9Lt+8rsexTpgWJlsU4G2/4kZd/AHuzsdm/7IKyshZDKoLEEdzFciN9bEz YXQ5Bq54+8sOLcJpXof3r8kfRxpez5OlfYJRQkKHj8GhSvnXG6aqAO+QA5zAmfg+QMjm0Wxe7G4F AAR6avERpop5LF7RavHozgbn9YqgREAoh06jutiTfFzl2G4uss8347yATkLSIXqnQVGKSPZLLSx3 /6BTpL6UXmT8yFSCJlnatpQUVkDyz9+HEa34l0QmPyjhxxYY4z85MF0ZIK/1NH5THMtlYvyHAYGO GlmJIjyKo/pbSDRNIEOEwlMcz873cIRxyN1uC++vIKvC6BczixKau3SVCHUjX//EjwcJ9Z2B17W0 SOVeAqfVLBt+Sf0/rvxjORlKDQ++yGsCEMknP0k8d5Ox6EUUXqNWZ8XcA1fy3UJOA5757/6OGaRk kjs1jU0LViAOWS0mH/uTHMxrH+IOxWr7KSlL4JX/WEq5E5hRukTkKP9aC+RKYiHsxBoFbdIyTZwD 0tTyhMSsCW4JJLnVejFxn/py1lO++k7JPy9twDyaj6un7qWOkNdHBttSnN0WZLHP/ENhBbObxn7H K3n1hX19xhH4kp4x0XPEpQwlApgvoWzdbUjG6ZCWwhEJBPk7WpO8jVZh2VH4z1caQoi44Wcfj1z/ J5tTt6P3827UrkzITIw7qbERYE5JeOaBZ3QGltM4cLXJcDSyE4kswb7YzKhySm3KCdywFmvDK3PK rieG7T6bf9hS7hQx0S1sh0LPt0VUPewpiDOvFiQeKRnvGKxB4wV2/L1ZF2Hf4ys44rg2B8/9FmK9 a1Nwex3yoyNXmDWGgOLq9vyL
X-Report-Abuse-To: spam@quarantine9.antispamcloud.com
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/ldfZHUo8S4wQ2ybF5gBdtkxFu-A>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 07 May 2019 21:33:13 -0000

 

> On May 7, 2019, at 1:38 PM, Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie> wrote:
> 
> Question for ya on that Barry - do you think that MUA
> and mail server implementers would actually bounce
> messages as strictly as Martin's document might call
> for? I'm not one of those implementers, so I don't know,
> but I'd not be surprised to hear that in fact they'd
> continue to prioritise mail delivery (for non spam)
> over protocol purity.

The alternative is what I see in "modern" specifications, like e.g. QUIC. Something like "MUST NOT" send extensions that have been previously negotiated and "MAY" terminate the connection with prejudice if the peer does something illegal. And yes, implementations follow the MAY path.

-- Christian Huitema

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email