Subject: [ietf-smtp] Items for rfc5321bis

From: Dave Crocker <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 29 Dec 2019 15:41:03 -0800

To get these into the discussion mix:

1. RFC 5598 // Add a citation to this, which is am IETF-stream consensus 
description of email architecture and terminology. Remove language that 
conflicts with that document.

2. RFC 6409 // Add a citation and text that clarifies SMTP is for MTA 
interactions and not those involving MUAs.

3. Section 3.7 Mail Gatewaying // Delete

    This topic is not relevant to SMTP.   It is relevant for processes 
at a higher level in the architecture and belongs in a separate 
discussion. The normative language here is actually counter-productive. 
Moving this text to a separate discussion will permit it to be reviewed 
and modified to represent modern operational realities.

4. Section 3.9. Mailing Lists and Aliases // Delete

    Basically, this section is archaic.  In reality, neither of these 
topics pertains to the mechanism for moving email from an Internet 
originating MTA to an Internet delivering MTA, which is what SMTP does. 
These are issues at a higher level in email architecture.  The section's 
presence in the protocol doc is counter-productive.

5. Section 4.1.1.6 Verify (vrfy) // Consider deleting

    My impression is that abuse behavior has rendered this command 
dangerous in SMTP.

6. Section 4.1.1.7 Expand (EXPN) // Delete

    My impression is that it has been decades since this command was 
reasonable for use on the Internet in SMTP.

7. Section F.1 TURN // Delete normative clause.

    The word 'deprecate' has a definitive semantic.  The clause at the 
end saying 'should not' conflicts with that semantic.

    Whether this section should cite RFC 1985 and RFC 2645 is a separate 
question.

8. Review every normative assertion, for reasonableness in the face of 
modern operational challenges.  I suspect some should be changed.

d/
-- 
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net