ietf-smtp
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ietf-smtp] Curious, with this now being associated to emailcore, should list name change?

2020-07-18 14:15:59
You may want to have a look at the draft agenda, now posted at
https://www.ietf.org/proceedings/108/agenda/agenda-108-emailcore-00,
and noting that the example topics for rfc5321bis are references
to Appendix G of draft-klensin-rfc5321bis-03 (the agenda sort of
says that, but, IMO, it is easy to miss).  It is vaguely
possible that a new version of the I-D will be posted before the
BOF meets, but it is thoroughly unlikely that Appendix
names/numbers will change.

Alexey or Seth may be able to add to that, especially if you
have specific questions.

Beyond the agenda, "emailcore" seems to be a title or framework
for a lot of different ideas that may not have focused or
converged yet.  The purpose of a BOF is to move that process
along.

best,
  john


--On Saturday, July 18, 2020 14:55 -0400 E Sam
<winshell64(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com> wrote:

Hello all,

I'm out of the loop of the plans for the (future?) emailcore
working group

Any links where I can catch up and read more about this before
the IETF 108 meeting (if I can make it of course)

YES i DuckDuckGoed some information about it but I am still
out of the loop a little bit

Thank you all

On Fri, Jul 17, 2020 at 6:13 PM John C Klensin
<john-ietf(_at_)jck(_dot_)com> wrote:



--On Friday, July 17, 2020 14:57 -0700 Michael Peddemors
<michael(_at_)linuxmagic(_dot_)com> wrote:

Not sure what normally happens, but it might be confusing.

Independent of "normal", the name and mailing address of this
list is known by email developers and operators all over the
Internet.  It also consolidates some prior lists specifically
associated with mail headers, MIME, and non-ASCII addresses
and headers (and maybe others, probably including the lists
for the DRUMS and YAM WGs).   Changing its name (effectively
killing the list and starting another) would be disruptive in
the extreme.

Perhaps "emailcore" should be given a list of its own, but I
think that would not be helpful either.

"Email Core" would have a wider scope, and it might be
confusing if the list name was limited to 'smtp'.

Consider it a historical artifact and, like WG names (and
corresponding mailing list) that are chosen more for cuteness
than actual semantic value, accept it and move forward.

Please.


I will leave it to the BOF Chairs and/or ADs to comment on the
rest of this but my understanding is that they want to keep
the scope of "emailcore" as narrow as possible, at least
initially, rather than having it expand into "any email topic
that would be worth addressing".

Speaking only for myself, I note that the IETF has tried very
hard over the years to stay out of MUA design and issues.
Perhaps it is time to change that and take on at least some
MUA requirements (work is badly needed, IMO, in the non-ASCII
addresses and header space although I don't know if the IETF
as the right expertise to do it) but it would be a rather
large step.



Suggestion for topic for this group as well:

Unifying all the 'autodiscover' and 'autoconfig' methods
currently in place.. email client developers have now a very
convoluted set of requirements in order to find the
'recommended' settings for that domain or ISP etc..

There are several independent databases out there, eg
Apple's own, the ISPDB, and even some of Microsofts' own
email clients no longer follow traditional methods of
lookups.. It is a bit of a mess, that maybe the IETF would
like to weigh in on?

best,
   john

_______________________________________________
ietf-smtp mailing list
ietf-smtp(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-smtp

_______________________________________________
ietf-smtp mailing list
ietf-smtp(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-smtp


_______________________________________________
ietf-smtp mailing list
ietf-smtp(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-smtp

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