[Top] [All Lists]

RE: SMTP traffic control

2011-10-24 08:19:45

I don't think I'm squashing such an idea (standardization is usually 
beneficial). I'm more asking, IF we standardize what benefits do we expect 
given that many large ISPs do provide much of the feedback (just not in a 
standardized format)?

The question you asked at the end of your email is substantively different from 
my interpretation of the thread previously, so let me try to answer it: Most 
ISPs I'm familiar with are conveying the information through an over-use 
(perhaps "abuse") of 4xy errors, where several return codes may require reading 
the plain-text content to discern the variations in the responses.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Murray S. Kucherawy" <msk(_at_)cloudmark(_dot_)com>
To: "ietf-smtp(_at_)imc(_dot_)org" <ietf-smtp(_at_)imc(_dot_)org>
Sent: 10/24/2011 2:04 PM
Subject: RE: SMTP traffic control

-----Original Message-----
From: Rosenwald, Jordan 
Sent: Monday, October 24, 2011 4:16 AM
To: Murray S. Kucherawy; ietf-smtp(_at_)imc(_dot_)org
Subject: RE: SMTP traffic control

I know most major ISPs already provide that kind of data.  It's not
difficult with existing response codes.  Granted they're not in a
standard format (across ISPs). Given that any sender could mimic the
types of response codes the ISPs are using, but haven't, what level of
success can we really expect after a standardization effort?

Hi Jordan,

I'm confused: Senders are clients, not servers, so what response codes are they 

I think the proposal is to try to standardize what various servers are doing in 
the area of expressing retry or rate policy so that clients can comply 
universally rather than having to understand different syntaxes for different 
servers.  That seems like it can only be a benefit, as long as some critical 
mass of servers intend to adopt it.  And that, to me, is the real question.

How are the ISPs you know about conveying this information to clients at large?

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>