I support this document going forward. Below I suggest four improvements to the document. (1) In Introduction says: Note that this document doesn't apply to use of TLS in MTA-to-MTA SMTP. Can this be enhanced to include a pointer to where this can be found? (2) The next paragraph in the Introduction says: The main goal of the document is to provide consistent TLS server identity verification procedure across multiple email related protocols. Since this is a standards-track document, I think it would be better to say: This document provides a consistent TLS server identity verification procedure across multiple email related protocols. (3) Section 2 does a lot by reference, which is fine. I think it would help the reader to duplicate a bit of context from RFC 6125, in particular repeating the definitions of CN-ID, DNS-ID, and SRV-ID. (4) Section 3 needs to state first that the certificate passes certification path validation as described in Section 6 of RFC 5280, and second passes the email-specific rules in this section. Russ