[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ietf-smtp] Possible cont4ibution to moving forward with RFC5321bis SMTP

2019-12-26 15:30:44

--On Thursday, December 26, 2019 14:23 -0500 Keith Moore
<moore(_at_)network-heretics(_dot_)com> wrote:


Just to clarify my point-of-view, I don't see the recent spam
discussions as resulting in significant new text in
RFC5231bis. What I imagine for RFC5321bis is at most some very
slight tweaking of the wording.    As far as I can tell it
was just a coincidence that the issue with the IETF MTA
cropped up at about the same time you started to ask about


I don't either.  But I don't see it as useful to revise 5321
without some consensus, however rough, about whether or not
something should be said about those issues.  I note in that
regard that there are advantages and uses for originator
authentication that have little or nothing to do with anti-spam
activities.   I also interpret some recent work and statements
within the IETF as leading toward prohibiting email that is not
encrypted hop-by-hop on the grounds of privacy protection not
anti-spam efforts.  If a WG comes together and treats those
issues as out of scope, it would be fine with me.  I just don't
think we should either be ignoring the issue or assuming that
everyone agrees with those who have spoken up most loudly in
recent weeks.


ietf-smtp mailing list