MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAOEezJTyEf+Sn9ZqQPue1DFUSoFO211YogJ6ufYJxswWzXk=_A@mail.gmail.com>
 <20190106010828.CC431200C5ED52@ary.qy>
 <CAOEezJShOYkmy8-E+8zG=CPXxrWNcxf8q8W8MnW-v1RT0FzEWw@mail.gmail.com>
 <123cecc0-aba2-9530-c0d9-b6437f295140@domblogger.net>
 <5169b5ea-f092-5a59-b037-b0bb45a9ff7f@spamtrap.tnetconsulting.net>
In-Reply-To: <5169b5ea-f092-5a59-b037-b0bb45a9ff7f@spamtrap.tnetconsulting.net>
From: Viruthagiri Thirumavalavan <giri@dombox.org>
Date: Sun, 6 Jan 2019 10:53:12 +0530
Message-ID: <CAOEezJQ9xv9b28=b0xvM18WD1ik+6e5hS3odw6eonEr40x0pmg@mail.gmail.com>
To: uta@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000a3b6f9057ec34f8b"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/uta/_0CMOT3xlOAepLjVWWI_IImMbCM>
Subject: Re: [Uta] SMTP Over TLS on Port 26 - Implicit TLS Proposal
Precedence: list

--000000000000a3b6f9057ec34f8b
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"

>
> I'm going to agree with Viruthagiri on this one.  Setting up a web
> server, including TLS certificate, is more advanced than many people are
> comfortable with.  Granted, all of the requirements / steps involved are
> relatively simple in and of themselves.  There are more than a few of
> them, any one of which can be problematic for someone who is completely
> new to doing such.


Finally there is one person agree with me on something. Your response is a
sight for sore eyes mate.
Anyone else wanna join me? I don't think SMTPS will be introduced anytime
soon if you guys are silent.

Don't get me wrong. I don't want to standardise a flawed solution. That's
the last thing I want to do.  However if my solution really makes sense,
then it can make a difference to the SMTP world.

@Viktor Dukhovni

Because of your criticism, I improved my solution. Credit goes to you.  Thanks
very much for that

@John

Your new criticisms are most welcome. But I'm not sure whether your old
criticisms are valid.

IDNs use a complex encoding and there is no reason to assume the encoding
> won't occasionally include the string "26pref".


Can you provide an example where it's not the case?

Sorry, but this is a fantasy.  SMTP routing still falls back to an A
> record if there's no MX and the DNS has been around for 30 years.  And
> your assmptions about what is hard and what is easy may be correct for
> your personal situation, but they are not true in general.
> Look at it this way -- if you can set up an STS server in less than a
> decade, you're ahead of the game.


Here is the problem with that part.  A records are IE6 equivalent in the
SMTP world. These days everyone moved to the MX records. There are rare
cases where some mail servers still rely on A records.

My solution doesn't deal with A records. It's the clients decision whether
to use MX record or A record.

Let's just pretend my solution rely on A records, you are criticising my
work saying that 0.1% people not gonna upgrade to "MX Records". On the
other hand, you think 100% of the internet gonna upgrade to a completely
new system STS.

Isn't that irony?

--000000000000a3b6f9057ec34f8b
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div dir=3D"ltr"><blockq=
uote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1p=
x solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">I&#39;m going to agree with Viru=
thagiri on this one.=C2=A0 Setting up a web=C2=A0<br>server, including TLS =
certificate, is more advanced than many people are=C2=A0<br>comfortable wit=
h.=C2=A0 Granted, all of the requirements / steps involved are=C2=A0<br>rel=
atively simple in and of themselves.=C2=A0 There are more than a few of=C2=
=A0<br>them, any one of which can be problematic for someone who is complet=
ely=C2=A0<br>new to doing such.</blockquote><div><br></div><div>Finally the=
re is one person agree with me on something. Your response is a sight for s=
ore eyes mate.=C2=A0</div><div>Anyone else wanna join me? I don&#39;t think=
 SMTPS will be introduced anytime soon if you guys are silent.</div><div><b=
r></div><div>Don&#39;t get me wrong. I don&#39;t want to standardise a flaw=
ed solution. That&#39;s the last thing I want to do.=C2=A0 However if my so=
lution really makes sense, then it can make a difference to the SMTP world.=
</div><div><br></div><div><a class=3D"gmail_plusreply" id=3D"gmail-plusRepl=
yChip-0">@Viktor Dukhovni</a><br></div><div><a class=3D"gmail_plusreply"><b=
r></a></div><div><a class=3D"gmail_plusreply">Because of your criticism, I =
improved my solution. Credit goes to you.=C2=A0=C2=A0</a><a class=3D"gmail_=
plusreply">Thanks very=C2=A0much for that</a></div><div><a class=3D"gmail_p=
lusreply"><br></a></div><div><a class=3D"gmail_plusreply">@John</a></div><d=
iv><a class=3D"gmail_plusreply"><br></a></div><div><a class=3D"gmail_plusre=
ply">Your new=C2=A0</a><a class=3D"gmail_plusreply">criticisms are most wel=
come. But=C2=A0</a><a class=3D"gmail_plusreply">I&#39;m not sure whether yo=
ur old criticisms are valid.=C2=A0</a></div><div><a class=3D"gmail_plusrepl=
y"><br></a></div><div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px=
 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">IDN=
s use a complex encoding and there is no reason to assume the encoding<br>w=
on&#39;t occasionally include the string &quot;26pref&quot;.</blockquote></=
div><div><br></div><div>Can you provide an example where it&#39;s not the c=
ase?</div><div><br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:=
0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">=
Sorry, but this is a fantasy.=C2=A0 SMTP routing still falls back to an A<b=
r>record if there&#39;s no MX and the DNS has been around for 30 years.=C2=
=A0 And<br>your assmptions about what is hard and what is easy may be corre=
ct for<br>your personal situation, but they are not true in general.<br>Loo=
k at it this way -- if you can set up an STS server in less than a<br>decad=
e, you&#39;re ahead of the game.</blockquote><div><br></div><div>Here is th=
e problem with that part.=C2=A0 A records are IE6 equivalent in the SMTP wo=
rld. These days everyone moved to the MX records. There are rare cases wher=
e some mail servers still rely on A records.=C2=A0</div><div><br></div><div=
>My solution doesn&#39;t deal with A records. It&#39;s the clients decision=
 whether to use MX record or A record.=C2=A0</div><div><br></div><div>Let&#=
39;s just pretend my solution rely on A records, you are criticising my wor=
k saying that 0.1% people not gonna upgrade to &quot;MX Records&quot;. On t=
he other hand, you think 100% of the internet gonna upgrade to a completely=
 new system STS.=C2=A0</div><div><br></div><div>Isn&#39;t that irony?=C2=A0=
=C2=A0</div><div><br></div></div></div></div></div>

--000000000000a3b6f9057ec34f8b--