IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [yam] [secdir] secdir review of draft-ietf-yam-rfc1652bis-03

Arnt Gulbrandsen <arnt@gulbrandsen.priv.no> Mon, 08 March 2010 10:16 UTC

Return-Path: <arnt@gulbrandsen.priv.no>
X-Original-To: yam@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: yam@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DEFE73A68EE for <yam@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 8 Mar 2010 02:16:09 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.598
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id mT3OfRvH-Le8 for <yam@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 8 Mar 2010 02:16:08 -0800 (PST)
Received: from strange.aox.org (strange.aox.org [IPv6:2001:4d88:100c::1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 17CE53A6881 for <yam@ietf.org>; Mon, 8 Mar 2010 02:16:02 -0800 (PST)
Received: from fri.gulbrandsen.priv.no (kalyani.aox.org [79.140.39.164]) by strange.aox.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 86019FA001A; Mon, 8 Mar 2010 10:16:16 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from arnt@gulbrandsen.priv.no (HELO libertango.gulbrandsen.priv.no) by fri.gulbrandsen.priv.no (Archiveopteryx 3.1.3) with esmtp id 1268043347-97687-97686/5/31 (2 recipients); Mon, 8 Mar 2010 11:15:47 +0100
Message-Id: <4B94CE34.5000000@gulbrandsen.priv.no>
Date: Mon, 08 Mar 2010 11:15:16 +0100
From: Arnt Gulbrandsen <arnt@gulbrandsen.priv.no>
Organization: Me, http://arnt.gulbrandsen.priv.no
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.1.8pre) Gecko/20100120 Shredder/3.0.2pre
Mime-Version: 1.0
To: yam@ietf.org
References: <4B8E515A.6060608@isode.com> <6.2.5.6.2.20100303103218.0ba092a0@resistor.net> <4B90ED1C.8040905@tana.it> <6.2.5.6.2.20100305051249.09f24f38@resistor.net> <4B923E1E.4070201@tana.it> <6.2.5.6.2.20100306054559.08fe2908@resistor.net> <4B92DEBC.9030209@dcrocker.net> <4B939BBC.6040102@isode.com> <01NKGR6SSL4G00DRKJ@mauve.mrochek.com> <CA8B6EE88BE8D3B9D12C696D@PST.JCK.COM>
In-Reply-To: <CA8B6EE88BE8D3B9D12C696D@PST.JCK.COM>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: Re: [yam] [secdir] secdir review of draft-ietf-yam-rfc1652bis-03
X-BeenThere: yam@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Yet Another Mail working group discussion list <yam.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/yam>, <mailto:yam-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/yam>
List-Post: <mailto:yam@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:yam-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/yam>, <mailto:yam-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 08 Mar 2010 10:16:10 -0000

On 03/08/2010 01:07 AM, John C Klensin wrote:
> --On Sunday, March 07, 2010 10:40 -0800 Ned Freed
> <ned.freed@mrochek.com>  wrote:
>> Something like
>>
>>    Since MIME semantics are transport neutral the 8bitMIME option provides no
>>    added capability to dessiminate maleare than is provided by unextended 7bit SMTP.
>>
>> would be fine to say here.
>
> FWIW, I agree with Ned.

AOL.

(I always wondered what the point of BINARYMIME is/was.)

Arnt

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email