[Top] [All Lists]

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

2020-01-02 08:57:09
On 1/1/2020 1:40 PM, Richard Clayton wrote:

We cannot prescribe whether a receiver is going to accept email, you can
merely state what the correct protocol is for the transfer and for
efficient signaling of accept/reject decisions.


We am supportive of focusing on SMTP compliancy fine tuning. The administrative local policy stuff, while all good to know, good for an Informational Status doc, but not a BCP, nor for RFC5321bis PS work, it would be never ending with extremely rough positions. If some local sites decide to reject IP-literals based on decision that contains bias so be it, they will deal with the false positives, but it is not SMTP.

We should double down on HELO/EHLO IP-literal correct syntax and definition.

However, I might be supportive of a relaxation of the field definition so that EHLO only basically functions as a server/client capabilities negotiation.


ietf-smtp mailing list

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