Re: Fully functional email address

Christian Huitema <huitema@huitema.net> Sun, 15 June 2025 19:45 UTC

Return-Path: <huitema@huitema.net>
X-Original-To: ietf@mail2.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietf@mail2.ietf.org
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail2.ietf.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F38ED353EA74 for <ietf@mail2.ietf.org>; Sun, 15 Jun 2025 12:45:52 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at ietf.org
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.699
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.699 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_INVALID=0.1, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_SAFE_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: mail2.ietf.org (amavisd-new); dkim=neutral reason="invalid (public key: not available)" header.d=mfg.outbound
Received: from mail2.ietf.org ([166.84.6.31]) by localhost (mail2.ietf.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 1qnfJ8v2jbGH for <ietf@mail2.ietf.org>; Sun, 15 Jun 2025 12:45:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from se01.mfg.siteprotect.com (se01.mfg.siteprotect.com [64.26.60.164]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-256) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mail2.ietf.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C3056353EA6E for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sun, 15 Jun 2025 12:45:52 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mfg.outbound; s=default; h=To:In-Reply-To:Cc:References:Message-Id:Date: Subject:Mime-Version:From:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:reply-to: sender:bcc; bh=aURfZ8D9IhPBoz8tT6yUtSZYzRgCIki9lYR+/xRMm6c=; b=mQ77aI//fzlTAZ ZXPvSGfAW8nVIsyEx81iRSPXIaYe5WiEFcjcxW5eTkZqFmyVCn2tX9LxRl8RhVL1R8eaJJN71iCKW z/iiGgG2YsRdkRH28CS8K7Zn+tgm5Rs3JvDMBgFAQyg/MYUNZgaaisIov910BJfoHKfH6imDEcL7I J/HDduU8s1zMijfkopkoJOu1fx8KVzsl783bQ00JgqIc+KfQC54JcFMz1U2VqRgHxLbDOlXiOkp86 E1CMEjNAJT9XClDwvLlzx5ohFQfMaQ05ZD1rYMLdqHdJ755fNyVePEqx3TDo5diHZI+lek03jG5ui eAacVbbpLiA//bWTApDw==;
Received: from smtpauth01.mfg.siteprotect.com ([64.26.60.150]) by se01.mfg.siteprotect.com with esmtp (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from <huitema@huitema.net>) id 1uQtKL-00BP9T-E4; Sun, 15 Jun 2025 15:45:51 -0400
Received: from smtpclient.apple (unknown [50.47.205.35]) (Authenticated sender: huitema@huitema.net) by smtpauth01.mfg.siteprotect.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4bL3X80004z9hypw0; Sun, 15 Jun 2025 15:45:43 -0400 (EDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
From: Christian Huitema <huitema@huitema.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
Subject: Re: Fully functional email address
Date: Sun, 15 Jun 2025 12:45:32 -0700
Message-Id: <50FFA5F1-6895-4C6C-A4C7-1DA2226CA07B@huitema.net>
References: <18892.1750014795@obiwan.sandelman.ca>
In-Reply-To: <18892.1750014795@obiwan.sandelman.ca>
To: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (22F76)
Authentication-Results: mfg.siteprotect.com; auth=pass smtp.auth=huitema@huitema.net
X-Originating-IP: 64.26.60.150
X-SpamExperts-Domain: mfg.outbound
X-SpamExperts-Username: 64.26.60.150/31
Authentication-Results: mfg.siteprotect.com; auth=pass smtp.auth=64.26.60.150/31@mfg.outbound
X-SpamExperts-Outgoing-Class: unsure
X-SpamExperts-Outgoing-Evidence: Combined (0.33)
X-Recommended-Action: accept
X-Filter-ID: 9kzQTOBWQUFZTohSKvQbgI7ZDo5ubYELi59AwcWUnuUGOMOFcYdMnP49Sk4TD9Y7VH9pI7PYVi18 iRSyg8J9Eyu2SmbhJN1U9FKs8X3+Nt127hcteP1p0NVNV47moiZtUnZMMMyaNBeO+OvFQHUlG4JL M0i5ZAms0EHrvcCaVIORnoKmBwCRLcqVt+uac2/EGnT3EFAinyrilm9zau/FuzkQt9Nb4Ml7QXdk EetczWCkiPMu7DlqTF73q9pLGZdaeB7itP8hgjDRserKv4bhb+M0mI84hBFMfKUquD9A9/DEMzer JfQa9UAYKsgEV8p+MUJTS2Jsxpkx+IHIsDarm+PxdXCeFSKzaZXiMHELeBjH3nfv/utnYfV8/jAb G6uKQ7uD0x/9Y/MF6exFt7k4K/hhiKkY5DM9o76pUDkoCG2M6xR3YG5WY4ZBzeBIqafzo7iClrzk jaRXGpQId+enita6tFGvA8bdSZzmH/E+Ef6twkG0qFRTw5qT99v3zaMxjQQkd+wtSwDKprMrDIV2 LLkvJHACicxgCCa10WqDZqdzvlCWrx3wk5x6nEZMAdZPgPsOGgHmNlEjj7P5oJPd68j6C9fjqmFv iGVSxDSeFwzXs2KsRjKrCowEavDwQuKoZ1ELSwiDt2oZmPOasfXMHEKtWIGU5SFYvI8oeusXPXwa tsMCc/sXmci2B9cU+AQeTfD6cxsdFKDXY5IAQfIM9eUCE3kFEoSxr3AVIDDc6dp0YSDf7/jEssVa /o1cYUgTok4SpEwQmXl78i7Fh+r9gPGDDHmJ4/8qN3YlK9LAF/LZtGRZslAywRrN7EDOcWKRb+lH bvhS27b1KEdhaUPR+17mgrRrSFLpmFg/pGvBMkBv21n4LnI5zZgAaRoQ/U07CEl7VhbF26JYhRA/ VGRFAm1TEY6ANME+CeSYRICl142iNJstiP6vPi78MbmFBe1S+lLsee6aeidy5k//OFLz/806CRcd JFOgBzsky+7d4upFOCd2gOutp3tb61VFRGMeUV8ShebT8U8Xw9HTDfreWQzNaImMIxXwb8aAKgE9 0Jm+o19CLNrfHhC92ahtOmc6fpRRNBRV6cMlQ5JHR3RfTGu1/wl/f+Tjkn2bQ/A8pE7pmGXCOLP7 0W6tjDmybQR0UM6c833vP+Zo0SOxd5kRCQDk5nWIiIcthdTaotkIarQx9rxOIu3CfAuBPlivwnte tOslUUxmPdNgSNM57A1S43oOGyEsNEVGlVphGeDtVD4=
X-Report-Abuse-To: spam@se02.mfg.siteprotect.com
X-Complaints-To: abuse@se01.mfg.siteprotect.com
Message-ID-Hash: PVIVNM5AMYJRISOVLPO4VBMNZ3UDB57X
X-Message-ID-Hash: PVIVNM5AMYJRISOVLPO4VBMNZ3UDB57X
X-MailFrom: huitema@huitema.net
X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; header-match-ietf.ietf.org-0; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header
CC: Paul Wouters <paul.wouters=40aiven.io@dmarc.ietf.org>, S Moonesamy <sm+ietf@elandsys.com>, ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.9rc6
Precedence: list
List-Id: "IETF-Discussion. This is the most general IETF mailing list, intended for discussion of technical, procedural, operational, and other topics for which no dedicated mailing lists exist." <ietf.ietf.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/qTJdOh6CyZ_tQo6NGI9FHtW9dp0>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Owner: <mailto:ietf-owner@ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:ietf-join@ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:ietf-leave@ietf.org>

 

> On Jun 15, 2025, at 12:14 PM, Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> Paul Wouters <paul.wouters=40aiven.io@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:
>> In this particular case, the individual should be aware, as they added
>> an auto-responder that senders need to respond to with a magic
>> incantation constituting some binding legal contract. They should not
>> be surprised that the majority of IETF participants will refuse to
>> engage with such additional terms.
> 
>> I want to note that using the IETF mailing lists for off-topic
>> discussions because you cannot email people individually, is not a good
>> reason for using our mailing lists.
> 
> So, assume it's on-topic.
> Assume it's a sectorial reviewer.
> Assume some AD tells me that I'm supposed to respond to their review.
> 
> Now, would you mind if I just decline to interact?

First, to the general topic of email: basically, email is dying. Or rather, it is becoming really hard to deploy individual servers. Sooner or later, you get flagged as a spammer by one of the DNS blacklists, and you lose connectivity with a bunch of other small servers. Rather painful.

Second, on reviews. Our review system does not actually require sending feedback by individual email. You can submit your review through the data tracker, and we have per draft mailing lists of authors, so we never need to send direct emails.

So, the state of email is bad, but the state of reviews is OK.

-- Christian Huitema