On 16/01/2021 21:53, Barry Leiba wrote:
On the process issue, the reason for Experimental is that we don’t know the
practical aspects of implementing this in MUAs and having users actually
use them, both in sending reactions and in viewing the reactions we get
back. I’m very pleased that this document actually contains Section 7,
which describes what the experiment needs to answer (thanks, Dave!), and
wish all Experimental drafts did that.
Given the uncertainty about when this is actually practical, but the
necessity of having a standard protocol to try in order to find out, I
think Experimental is the right approach.
The question that comes to my mind is; does the MUA still exist?
My MUA was largely eliminated by my ESP over a year ago and while a
search revealed many possible replacements, almost all of them ceased
development many years ago. Rather we are now in a world of social
media and web.
Obviously the concept in this I-D is integral with social media but what
happens with web mail? I know that the mantra of the IETF is to avoid
user interfaces when at all possible but it seems to me that this is a
case where it should not be avoided. At the same time, I find most
aspects of the web inimical to working over e-mail so struggle to see
where this would fit in without making things worse.
Tom Petch
Barry
On Sat, Jan 16, 2021 at 4:28 PM Eliot Lear <lear@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
IMHO Email has been missing these reactions for years, and this is a great
idea. I have several comments about the text, and one process comment.
Let me start with the latter: was there a discussion about whether to make
this PS rather than experimental? I see one really substantial issue with
the draft that isn’t discussed, but I don’t know that it is insurmountable
(discussed below).
On the text, one issue in Section 2, in the ABNF:
part-content = emoji *(lwsp emoji) CRLF
emoji = emoji_sequence
emoji_sequence = { defined in [Emoji-Seq] }
base-emojis = thumbs-up / thumbs-down / grinning-face / frowning-face / crying-face
thumbs-up = {U+1F44D}
thumbs-down = {U+1F44E}
grinning-face = {U+1F600}
frowning-face = {U+2639}
crying-face = {U+1F622}
I don’t understand where base-emojis are used. Was “emoji" meant to be "emoji_sequence / base-emojis”?
In Security Considerations in Section 5, I think it’s probably useful to talk about the risk of spoofed messages creating spoofed reactions, perhaps a lot of them. What mitigation techniques should be employed? One might be to look for a valid Authentication-Results header.
Finally, what happens if the same source sends two reactions in two separate emails? Can one send a blank message to remove a reaction?
In Section 3, one nit:
...
1. If a received message R contains an In-Reply-To: header-field,
check to see if it references a previous message the MUA has sent
or received.
2. If R's In-Reply-To: does reference one, then check R's message
content for a part with a "reaction" content-disposition at
either the outermost level or as part of a multipart at the
outermost level.
As “R” is only ever referenced here, my suggestion is to either lose the variable, or to refer to the other message with a variable, for consistency.
Again, thanks for the draft, and I look forward to its approval, preferably as a PS ;-)
Eliot
On 16 Jan 2021, at 02:14, The IESG <iesg-secretary@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
The IESG has received a request from an individual submitter to consider
the
following document: - 'React: Indicating Summary Reaction to a Message'
<draft-crocker-inreply-react-06.txt> as Experimental RFC
The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits final
comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the
last-call@xxxxxxxx mailing lists by 2021-02-12. Exceptionally, comments
may
be sent to iesg@xxxxxxxx instead. In either case, please retain the
beginning
of the Subject line to allow automated sorting.
Abstract
The popularity of social media has led to user comfort with easily
signaling basic reactions to an author's posting, such as with a
'thumbs up' or 'smiley' graphic. This specification permits a
similar facility for Internet Mail.
The file can be obtained via
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-crocker-inreply-react/
No IPR declarations have been submitted directly on this I-D.
_______________________________________________
IETF-Announce mailing list
IETF-Announce@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce
--
last-call mailing list
last-call@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call
