Watson Ladd wrote in <CACsn0cnrKRkmBMEtnC=DF5ZD0dXO64nCcENRAA+PHiBTJP3VuA@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>: |On Tue, Oct 29, 2024 at 7:25 PM John R Levine <johnl@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: |> On Tue, 29 Oct 2024, Paul Wouters wrote: |>>> |>>> I can easily imagine scenarios where STARTTLS makes no sense ... |> As I may have said once or twice, the STARTTLS stuff belongs in the A/S. | |And I don't really get why[.] I concur. And what nonsense argument (!) about a "forty year old protocol". Maybe the IETF gets sponsored by counting released documents. I would instead produce a 5321-how-it-should-have-been-now-polised for interest purposes, and create an updated SMTP RFC that includes transport layer security and more reply codes, as are needed for real-life SMTP use cases. And, of course, in my opinion (now speaking about my opinion, mind you), MTA-STS isn't it. SMTP needs more special treatment, as it is distinct from other email protocols. Every normal person understands this. Thank you, --steffen | |Der Kragenbaer, The moon bear, |der holt sich munter he cheerfully and one by one |einen nach dem anderen runter wa.ks himself off |(By Robert Gernhardt) | |And in Fall, feel "The Dropbear Bard"s ball(s). | |The banded bear |without a care, |Banged on himself fore'er and e'er | |Farewell, dear collar bear -- last-call mailing list -- last-call@xxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to last-call-leave@xxxxxxxx
