On Sat, Aug 04, 2007 at 07:25:14PM -0400, John C Klensin wrote: > > > --On Saturday, 04 August, 2007 19:09 -0400 Jeff Macdonald > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >... > > John and Ned, you both mentioned 'worth the effort'. Is that > > because you both believe the RFC wouldn't be an "Independent > > Submission"? I'm very new to this whole process, so forgive me > > if this is a stupid question. > > It is certainly not a stupid question. The question (at least > my version -- Ned might have a different one) is whether it > would be worth the trouble for existing server implementations > to change their code
I've viewed policy as something that is site specific. Therefore it makes sense that policy is configurable by an administrator. At least that is the case for me. I use a MTA with a custom sieve implementation. > and existing client implementations to adapt to the new sub series. I'm not aware of any MTAs that pay attention to extended SMTP codes. Could you supply some examples? <snip> > So the question is whether this change would have enough value > to tell the community that they should go change things and > whether the implementer community would believe it has enough > value to be worth the trouble to make those changes. I have my > doubts about both. Depends on which communities we are talking about. I don't think there needs to be any server changes. It simple a new set of codes for administrators to use when they set their policies. But I suppose you may be talking about anti-spam black boxes. > Compared to either of those questions, the cost of pushing a > relatively short and clear document through the IETF system is > fairly low although I would discourage you from trying unless > you think the answers to those questions would be "yes, enough > implementers would believe this is worthwhile to do it if the > spec were written and approved". I do. Thanks again. -- :: Jeff Macdonald | Principal Engineer, Messaging Technologies :: e-Dialog | [EMAIL PROTECTED] :: 131 Hartwell Ave. | Lexington, MA 02421 :: v: 781-372-1922 | f: 781-863-8118 :: www.e-dialog.com
