IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [yam] Issue #10: RFC 5321 3.9: add tiny subsection

S Moonesamy <sm+ietf@elandsys.com> Fri, 11 December 2009 20:48 UTC

Return-Path: <sm@elandsys.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 88D373A6816 for <yam@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 11 Dec 2009 12:48:42 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.044
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.044 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.064, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB=0.619]
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 VfezB+PQ7jol for <yam@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 11 Dec 2009 12:48:41 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.elandsys.com (mail.elandsys.com [208.69.177.125]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CB9133A659B for <yam@ietf.org>; Fri, 11 Dec 2009 12:48:41 -0800 (PST)
Received: from subman.elandsys.com ([41.136.235.22]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.elandsys.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id nBBKmMn7011208; Fri, 11 Dec 2009 12:48:27 -0800
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/simple; d=elandsys.com; s=mail; t=1260564509; x=1260650909; bh=RzXNH4wvokwsTQlbTOMnn+BpUqQ=; h=Message-Id:Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References: Mime-Version:Content-Type; b=G7N1AfgvfHNtrh11RvqM6IuH2+5Sry/OvhLkpnUvy0SowSIa+MUqkYxqQ9zbRJVgF Km3gwQK2pWHp0iEuswDR4UKbmiCpFTAMtFYZmrbzVsRTLGEEk44UQWH7cqQ3Z8fbDL dUXL6DxHpsPrBIdo4oAA5p8YSNgaqSI2iWdR4ing=
Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20091211122230.02eb2298@resistor.net>
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 2009 12:47:29 -0800
To: Alessandro Vesely <vesely@tana.it>
From: S Moonesamy <sm+ietf@elandsys.com>
In-Reply-To: <4B224F10.7050202@tana.it>
References: <6.2.5.6.2.20091206014538.033cdcc8@elandnews.com> <4B1BE2D5.9010405@tana.it> <6.2.5.6.2.20091206102946.04601b90@resistor.net> <01NGXSHS3NUQ0000BI@mauve.mrochek.com> <4B1CDDE8.2090100@tana.it> <6.2.5.6.2.20091207072413.047ff4a0@resistor.net> <4B1E0967.1040006@tana.it> <6.2.5.6.2.20091208135556.030cfb28@resistor.net> <4B1FC47F.40103@tana.it> <6.2.5.6.2.20091209155607.032eff40@resistor.net> <4B224F10.7050202@tana.it>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"
Cc: yam@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [yam] Issue #10: RFC 5321 3.9: add tiny subsection
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: Fri, 11 Dec 2009 20:48:42 -0000

Hi Alessandro,
At 05:54 11-12-2009, Alessandro Vesely wrote:
>FWIW, assuming the definition of forwarding has been amended, issues 
>related to section 3.9 could be addressed there like so:
>
>  7.x Privacy violations on forwarding
>
>  Since mailbox addresses are Personally Identifiable Information,
>  a.k.a. Personal Data, applications SHOULD track additions to aliases
>  and lists used in forwarding as described in section 3.9, possibly
>  retaining evidence of mailboxes' owners consent. The data model
>  SHOULD be designed so as to allow meaningful write-access control.
>
>That's not meant to be taken literally, just the idea.

As I mentioned previously, I logged Issue #10 using the message you 
posted at http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/yam/current/msg00164.html

Could you please clarify what text in RFC 5321 should be changed in 
regards to Issue #10 and suggest what the new text should be?

Regards,
S. Moonesamy
YAM WG Secretary

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email