On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 6:18 PM Dave Crocker <dhc(_at_)dcrocker(_dot_)net>
wrote:
On 9/26/2019 6:13 PM, David MacQuigg wrote:
I don't have time to argue over vocabulary. I'll just say that I find
it much more convenient to say "Receiver" instead of "the first Agent on
the Recipient's side of the Border, the one that interfaces directly
with the Transmitter". See
http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/Email_system for definitions of these
terms and examples of how they are useful in describing real systems.
For some reason, I prefer to used standardized terminology. It tends to
have more shared meaning. Otherwise terminology might be carefully
applied by the speaker but differentially understood by the listener.
That's the essence of ambiguity.
Hence, RFC 5598 wins the find-a-definition game.
RFC 5598 is great for describing email systems at the relay level, but we
need something more for a simple description at the administrative level.
Even the most complex network of relays can be modeled as a simpler network
of Actors, each with well-defined roles in an email system. Understanding
these roles is critical to understanding spam and email security.
I remember learning about email systems, primarily from RFC 5598. I found
Section 2 frustrating and had to give up and develop my own model at the
administrative level. I have found this model very useful in teaching and
in developing my own email system, box67.com.
_______________________________________________
ietf-smtp mailing list
ietf-smtp(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-smtp