Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- considered harmful
"John Levine" <johnl@taugh.com> Wed, 08 May 2019 15:50 UTC
Return-Path: <johnl@iecc.com>
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 269AE1200B7 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 8 May 2019 08:50:43 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1536-bit key) header.d=iecc.com header.b=hZKRFQvx; dkim=pass (1536-bit key) header.d=taugh.com header.b=Ul2BMFqG
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 3ZyO67K74O_Y for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 8 May 2019 08:50:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from gal.iecc.com (gal.iecc.com [IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126:0:43:6f73:7461]) (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 21A1B12013D for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 8 May 2019 08:50:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 38839 invoked from network); 8 May 2019 15:50:35 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=iecc.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=97b5.5cd2facb.k1905; i=johnl-iecc.com@submit.iecc.com; bh=qvytX19l1pVYHqPotWtBiXXUr5kD21aakfRjUuook+o=; b=hZKRFQvxdkYB3tajk7w2rlzrOlQbbz3RghI/Os7myEQFN5pJsK9e7qN2/YGWWxqma3TlXnB4PhtV7X1258pT8Utj5v2BKFgQiFACeFZTpXwRRTLxz2DGl738tcWas6A92eD0W4z0iYJRo0BkbKrGC0KVgbOzAiuWs9oHIz5yPQ+yWsjox1OV5BnEIdCCq5dZIJqrPkHfQR0uWFoaVVBkVOvpZpFXNqe15nO/Bl2lfsdIH4Ac7exNxEBAdtN1mFO1
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=taugh.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=97b5.5cd2facb.k1905; olt=johnl-iecc.com@submit.iecc.com; bh=qvytX19l1pVYHqPotWtBiXXUr5kD21aakfRjUuook+o=; b=Ul2BMFqGhzYm36kjPy43oQtJ12x1m0mwwkeqg7hWjWWflW5tgk60/1B9nVAvIxU70ccWUkg++jPwpXMk4jmDmx88iMls0YiuH5K0MhiRqRygT/MpA+zjo14ZLo8883G2Q3ssFi5+Dzl7DIkmTZM9O7C4wDMljBLxmudAXBDAZ5NS6/0lFTXRsD5WzomNbYyqPhrD6PGR1nZ9+7evKpCWfRMyPkat13DnWJSdfMzQMBaedq74TEKxzbfp1QgGpT6d
Received: from ary.qy ([64.246.232.221]) by imap.iecc.com ([64.57.183.75]) with ESMTPSA (TLS1.2 ECDHE-RSA AES-256-GCM AEAD, johnl@iecc.com) via TCP; 08 May 2019 15:50:35 -0000
Received: by ary.qy (Postfix, from userid 501) id 057A820137B056; Wed, 8 May 2019 11:50:34 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Wed, 08 May 2019 11:50:34 -0400
Message-Id: <20190508155035.057A820137B056@ary.qy>
From: John Levine <johnl@taugh.com>
To: ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- considered harmful
In-Reply-To: <53a9c16c-163c-a18a-371a-f8aa8697af15@cs.tcd.ie>
Organization: Taughannock Networks
X-Headerized: yes
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/wop-CcBaC1FqAYZKqN-d1OU6Bb4>
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: Wed, 08 May 2019 15:50:43 -0000
In article <53a9c16c-163c-a18a-371a-f8aa8697af15@cs.tcd.ie> you write: >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 Barry but I can say that increasingly we do. We observe that spamware is badly written, and there are mechanical errors that are strong indicators that the sender is not someone you want to hear from. A common spamware error is "early talking", sending SMTP commands before the server's initial banner. If you wait a few seconds before sending the banner, and hang up on anyone who sends a command first, you'll lose a lot of spam at low cost. Another is greylisting, deliberately soft-failing a new sender and seeing if it retries, since spamware generally won't. There's another whole can of worms about what to do with mail that doesn't validate under SPF, DKIM, or DMARC but let's not go there now. R's, John
- RE: deprecating Postel's principle- considered ha… BRUNGARD, DEBORAH A
- Re: deprecating Postel's principle- considered ha… Barry Leiba
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Stephen Farrell
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: deprecating Postel's principle- considered ha… Andrew G. Malis
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Barry Leiba
- Re: deprecating Postel's principle- considered ha… Warren Kumari
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Tony Li
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Stephen Farrell
- Re: deprecating Postel's principle- considered ha… Adam Roach
- Re: deprecating Postel's principle- considered ha… Salz, Rich
- Re: deprecating Postel's principle- considered ha… Joel M. Halpern
- Re: deprecating Postel's principle- considered ha… Adam Roach
- Re: [IAB] [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle… Christian Huitema
- Re: [IAB] [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle… Stephen Farrell
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Matthew Kerwin
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Rich Kulawiec
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Henning Schulzrinne
- Re: [arch-d] [IAB] deprecating Postel's principle… Henning Schulzrinne
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Randy Presuhn
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Christian Huitema
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Henning Schulzrinne
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Mark Andrews
- Re: deprecating Postel's principle- considered ha… Martin Thomson
- Re: [arch-d] [IAB] deprecating Postel's principle… Randy Bush
- Re: deprecating Postel's principle- considered ha… Joe Touch
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Carsten Bormann
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Masataka Ohta
- Re: deprecating Postel's principle- considered ha… Dave Cridland
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Jari Arkko
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… John C Klensin
- Re: deprecating Postel's principle- considered ha… Joe Touch
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Henning Schulzrinne
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: deprecating Postel's principle- considered ha… Paul Wouters
- Re: deprecating Postel's principle- considered ha… Dave Cridland
- Re: deprecating Postel's principle- considered ha… Dave Cridland
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Bless, Roland (TM)
- Re: deprecating Postel's principle- considered ha… Paul Wouters
- Re: deprecating Postel's principle- considered ha… Joe Touch
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Joe Touch
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… John Levine
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Keith Moore
- Re: deprecating Postel's principle- considered ha… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Joe Touch
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Keith Moore
- Re: deprecating Postel's principle- considered ha… John C Klensin
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Joe Touch
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Henning Schulzrinne
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Stephen Farrell
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Joe Touch
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Martin Thomson
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Carsten Bormann
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… S Moonesamy
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Lloyd Wood
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Eliot Lear
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Carsten Bormann
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Eliot Lear
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Joel M. Halpern
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Bob Briscoe
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Masataka Ohta
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Aaron Falk
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Henning Schulzrinne
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Henry S. Thompson