Re: [yam] Last Call: <draft-ietf-yam-rfc4409bis-02.txt> (Message Submission for Mail) to Full Standard

[S Moonesamy <[e-mail]>]

Hi Chris,

Thanks for taking the time to review the document.

At 15:20 24-08-2011, Chris Newman wrote:
>Informative reference to RFC 5068 / BCP 134:
>
>I think an informative reference would be helpful to readers, but if 
>adding that reference would cause an approval delay then expedience 
>is more important.

There was a comment about having such a reference ( 
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/yam/current/msg00744.html ).


>SMTP AUTH / STARTTLS:
>
>I have seen SMTP AUTH and STARTTLS work well operationally between 
>multiple independent implementations of submission. Problems with 
>those technologies related to MTA relay are unrelated to this 
>submission draft and thus need no additional text in this draft.

The input may be useful to the authors of the relevant specifications.

This is the last Last Call comment.  I'll consider all Last Call 
comments as having been addressed.

Regards,
S. Moonesamy