[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ietf-smtp] Email standard revision, was address maximum length

2019-11-29 11:16:59
On 26 Nov 2019, at 2:20, John C Klensin wrote:

 All I know at this point is that I was
approached by Barry, Alexey, and Pete about a possible plan to
spin up a WG to address some mail issues including producing and
processing Internet Standard documents to replace 5321 and 5322.

Since my name was mentioned, let me give you my short take on this:

Both 5321 and 5322 have been in the limbo state of "Draft Standard" for some time now. Not wildly important, but it bothers my sense of order.

The new xml2rfc version is now out. I wanted to play with it, so I converted my copy of rfc5322.xml to v3.

There were less than a dozen errata against 5322 that could be trivially fixed. I fixed them as part of my conversion.

It seemed like a lovely time to publish this and get 5322 to full "Internet Standard". Other things (e.g., MIME, utf8 mail, etc.) could be progressed as desired. I asked Barry and Alexey about how we might do this. Dealing with 5321 at the same time seemed appropriate, so Barry contacted John.

Note that most of the tough "should we update or not" issues are 5321 issues, not 5322. Even the "From: rewriting" issue is a gatewaying issue, not a message format issue per se. All of the 5322 issues (including "are we really documenting existing practice) seem to be handled by extensions to 5322 (again, like MIME) on the format side of things. So I contend that 5322 is pretty much ready to go, and 5321 is the more interesting problem. (Glad to hear disagreements with that position.)

So that's (in my view) how we got here. Barry and Alexey can jump in whenever they are over the jet lag and general wear of IETF week (which I am barely over myself).

Pete Resnick
All connections to the world are tenuous at best

ietf-smtp mailing list

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