IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Uta] SMTP Over TLS on Port 26 - Implicit TLS Proposal

"John R Levine" <johnl@taugh.com> Tue, 08 January 2019 17:58 UTC

Return-Path: <johnl@taugh.com>
X-Original-To: uta@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: uta@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3990C130F47 for <uta@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 8 Jan 2019 09:58:08 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, 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=M3ZOcnV2; dkim=pass (1536-bit key) header.d=taugh.com header.b=e9BMGA9l
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 ua5KEoz_EdMx for <uta@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 8 Jan 2019 09:58:06 -0800 (PST)
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 3AD94130F40 for <uta@ietf.org>; Tue, 8 Jan 2019 09:58:06 -0800 (PST)
Received: (qmail 40234 invoked from network); 8 Jan 2019 17:58:04 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=iecc.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-type:user-agent; s=9d28.5c34e4ac.k1901; bh=dWxNRk7Uzzkz7pe8O8389c3m7r4Kqq1I2raEblgJKIE=; b=M3ZOcnV2xfbirMJ9v7t08aD/ulSLjd3UnZMB20GOhn1Q8dq8tDj+1F9ZokTpXHcaGtad7+Yfp6nhNTTU7HoCxVnx8JQY7y5VrjofTl6kMHLo1wE7GqkIOwOetK2jG8k3OIdauuNhBrRnRvy1HFmbYCo4gOumZ7QO0VdUjMMBKDbDPD4XG8zKRvitGKKzVV+OHuAd+0fL9Kb845BDWXy/msyu29GIN0f4dMm24ie5FDH5p1qvnI6DlQx1RR3TNuOD
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=taugh.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-type:user-agent; s=9d28.5c34e4ac.k1901; bh=dWxNRk7Uzzkz7pe8O8389c3m7r4Kqq1I2raEblgJKIE=; b=e9BMGA9lr+5JVqbmjVu1+bycHP+VRcG5qpBzn+/1T5bpSdB2/6fHiYjA+ropLydwPT9EF7DbwcU7+EsMaN2oWrzlhnOjGznjm4pcnoUpa2u4ObHzSGIWBkv27SsOgmYakO+qVpcSpkqFqXv/aHCfZlMLePYbuC/HEx/yt9I1k01rso4l4dHoWgXrKyNeExF8BQLvy9XGRXTVElWVLk84sbjqA/yo3uZA/oXpfYAVmpIqJ/q8pdCx4krRso81naZB
Received: from localhost ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) by imap.iecc.com ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) with ESMTPS (TLS1.2/X.509/AEAD) via TCP6; 08 Jan 2019 17:58:04 -0000
Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2019 12:58:03 -0500
Message-ID: <alpine.OSX.2.21.1901081254480.12235@ary.local>
From: John R Levine <johnl@taugh.com>
To: Vittorio Bertola <vittorio.bertola@open-xchange.com>
Cc: uta@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <1114557706.21775.1546968984373@appsuite.open-xchange.com>
References: <87k1jfi2dd.fsf@fifthhorseman.net> <20190108172630.84DA9200C72467@ary.local> <1114557706.21775.1546968984373@appsuite.open-xchange.com>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.21 (OSX 202 2017-01-01)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"; format="flowed"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/uta/gvcUURpkC3z6LtnFNa9F-Sx9mnQ>
Subject: Re: [Uta] SMTP Over TLS on Port 26 - Implicit TLS Proposal
X-BeenThere: uta@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: UTA working group mailing list <uta.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/uta>, <mailto:uta-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/uta/>
List-Post: <mailto:uta@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:uta-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/uta>, <mailto:uta-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2019 17:58:08 -0000

On Tue, 8 Jan 2019, Vittorio Bertola wrote:
>> I don't understand why people are trying to reinvent the wheel when we
>> just defined a fairly round one a few months ago.
>
> DANE and MTA-STS provide an evolutionary and backwards compatible path for the transition to fully encrypted and authenticated email flows for those that care, but cannot force anyone to care and deploy them. What we are discussing is whether we could collectively exert gentle pressure (i.e. encrypt your email by this date or you won't be allowed to communicate any more) so that even those that don't care start to care.

The reports from MTA-STS give us a baseline.  It's a lot easier to propose 
a flag day if you can credibly say that 98% of all non-bot mail uses TLS 
now.

Regards,
John Levine, johnl@taugh.com, Taughannock Networks, Trumansburg NY
Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. https://jl.ly

v2.46.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status