[yam] deployment of 8BITMIME?
Tony Hansen <tony@att.com> Sun, 16 August 2009 21:50 UTC
Return-Path: <tony@att.com>
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 9596C3A690C for <yam@core3.amsl.com>; Sun, 16 Aug 2009 14:50:49 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -106.329
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.329 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.270, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 3ge+-ruDy8pW for <yam@core3.amsl.com>; Sun, 16 Aug 2009 14:50:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail120.messagelabs.com (mail120.messagelabs.com [216.82.250.83]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D1EA63A6901 for <yam@ietf.org>; Sun, 16 Aug 2009 14:50:48 -0700 (PDT)
X-VirusChecked: Checked
X-Env-Sender: tony@att.com
X-Msg-Ref: server-8.tower-120.messagelabs.com!1250459451!37244449!1
X-StarScan-Version: 6.1.3; banners=-,-,-
X-Originating-IP: [144.160.112.25]
Received: (qmail 18605 invoked from network); 16 Aug 2009 21:50:52 -0000
Received: from sbcsmtp3.sbc.com (HELO tlph064.enaf.dadc.sbc.com) (144.160.112.25) by server-8.tower-120.messagelabs.com with DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA encrypted SMTP; 16 Aug 2009 21:50:52 -0000
Received: from enaf.dadc.sbc.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by tlph064.enaf.dadc.sbc.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id n7GLopTm004632 for <yam@ietf.org>; Sun, 16 Aug 2009 16:50:51 -0500
Received: from alpd052.aldc.att.com (alpd052.aldc.att.com [130.8.42.31]) by tlph064.enaf.dadc.sbc.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id n7GLojhp004116 for <yam@ietf.org>; Sun, 16 Aug 2009 16:50:46 -0500
Received: from aldc.att.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by alpd052.aldc.att.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id n7GLojrJ012094 for <yam@ietf.org>; Sun, 16 Aug 2009 17:50:45 -0400
Received: from maillennium.att.com (mailgw1.maillennium.att.com [135.25.114.99]) by alpd052.aldc.att.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id n7GLog1F012029 for <yam@ietf.org>; Sun, 16 Aug 2009 17:50:42 -0400
Received: from [135.70.9.151] (vpn-135-70-9-151.vpn.west.att.com[135.70.9.151]) by maillennium.att.com (mailgw1) with ESMTP id <20090816215041gw1003ib5ae> (Authid: tony); Sun, 16 Aug 2009 21:50:42 +0000
X-Originating-IP: [135.70.9.151]
Message-ID: <4A887F30.90101@att.com>
Date: Sun, 16 Aug 2009 17:50:40 -0400
From: Tony Hansen <tony@att.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.22 (Windows/20090605)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Yet Another Mail Working Group <yam@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: [yam] deployment of 8BITMIME?
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: Sun, 16 Aug 2009 21:50:49 -0000
Some of us have been having a side conversation about interoperability reports and deployment reports. There's a point that John and Dave have been making that I think needs to be re-stated again: When you're looking at the PS => DS stage, you're concerned with interoperability, that is, "how well do different implementations of the protocol get along with each other?". But in the DS => FS stage, you're concerned with deployment, that is, "how far reaching has this protocol become?" YAM really needs to be looking at the deployment of the standards. Dave's latest pre-evaluation draft for RFC 1652 8BITMIME has this text in it: In the 15 years since publication, this specification has become an integral part of all professional SMTP software products and is widely supported [[and used?]] in Internet Mail operations. There are no RFC Errata on this specification. I'd like us to expand on this. It would be useful if members of the YAM working group can offer your first-hand knowledge of the deployment and use of the 8BITMIME option. To start the ball rolling, I'll offer this as part of a "deployment report": AT&T's in-house MTA used in our ISP services, Maillennium, has had 8BITMIME deployed for about 12 years. Please add to this list. Tony Hansen tony@att.com
- [yam] deployment of 8BITMIME? Tony Hansen
- Re: [yam] deployment of 8BITMIME? John C Klensin
- Re: [yam] deployment of 8BITMIME? Ned Freed
- Re: [yam] deployment of 8BITMIME? John Levine
- Re: [yam] deployment of 8BITMIME? Dave CROCKER
- Re: [yam] deployment of 8BITMIME? Alexey Melnikov