IETF
EMAILCORE
emailcore@jabber.ietf.org
Friday, March 25, 2022< ^ >
Meetecho has set the subject to: emailcore @ IETF 112
Room Configuration
Room Occupants

GMT+0
[03:18:52] yankprix leaves the room: Disconnected: Replaced by new connection
[03:18:56] yankprix joins the room
[11:13:06] Meetecho joins the room
[11:15:03] Murray Kucherawy_web_399 joins the room
[11:15:03] Dave Crocker_web_801 joins the room
[11:17:06] Meetecho has set the subject to: emailcore @ IETF 113
[11:19:01] Rumen Donchev_web_477 joins the room
[11:20:48] Todd Herr_web_105 joins the room
[11:21:48] Rumen Donchev_web_477 leaves the room
[11:25:14] Kazunori Fujiwara_web_481 joins the room
[11:25:38] John C Klensin joins the room
[11:26:38] John Klensin_web_296 joins the room
[11:26:39] Bron Gondwana_web_644 joins the room
[11:27:32] <Bron Gondwana_web_644> hi from the hills near Brno :)
[11:28:00] <John C Klensin> having a small technical problem- be right back, I hope.
[11:28:02] John C Klensin leaves the room
[11:29:19] John Klensin_web_296 leaves the room
[11:30:02] John Levine_web_192 joins the room
[11:30:09] Alexey Melnikov_web_901 joins the room
[11:30:39] <Alexey Melnikov_web_901> My apologies, I am a few minutes late as well
[11:30:49] Rumen Donchev_web_939 joins the room
[11:30:51] Francesca Palombini_web_703 joins the room
[11:30:56] Francesca Palombini_web_703 leaves the room
[11:30:56] Kenneth Murchison_web_765 joins the room
[11:31:00] Francesca Palombini_web_367 joins the room
[11:31:57] <Francesca Palombini_web_367> hello! I'm here too (outside of camera view)
[11:32:26] Joris Baum_web_906 joins the room
[11:33:11] <Todd Herr_web_105> I can do the note taking
[11:33:15] <Bron Gondwana_web_644> my network is too unreliable to volunteer sorry
[11:33:29] <Todd Herr_web_105> Also could you please move the microphone closer to yourself?
[11:33:48] <Bron Gondwana_web_644> much clearer
[11:34:40] Barry Leiba_web_241 joins the room
[11:35:26] Paolo Saviano_web_500 joins the room
[11:35:28] <Murray Kucherawy_web_399> My technical issue is that it's 4:30am.
[11:35:32] Hans-Jörg Happel_web_705 joins the room
[11:35:46] <Murray Kucherawy_web_399> :)
[11:35:56] Paolo Saviano_web_500 leaves the room
[11:36:17] James Galvin_web_641 joins the room
[11:38:36] <John Levine_web_192> want to try the small point I brought up?
[11:38:40] <John Levine_web_192> points
[11:38:48] <Alexey Melnikov_web_901> Which ones?
[11:39:11] <John Levine_web_192> vrfy, and so forth
[11:39:37] <Alexey Melnikov_web_901> We will start with ENHANCEDSTATUSCODES, then we will see
[11:40:20] Benson Muite_web_646 joins the room
[11:41:03] John C Klensin joins the room
[11:41:23] John Klensin_web_890 joins the room
[11:41:51] <John Levine_web_192> looks reasonable
[11:42:11] <Murray Kucherawy_web_399> +1
[11:43:04] Bron Gondwana_web_644 leaves the room
[11:43:08] Bron Gondwana_web_626 joins the room
[11:45:43] Pete Resnick_web_573 joins the room
[11:48:55] <Dave Crocker_web_801> Using registration as a quality control mechanism makes sense when the registration namespace is limited, or the operational dangers of registering 'poor' entries is dangerous.  Neither seem to apply here.
[11:50:58] <Dave Crocker_web_801> Spec Required ensure a single reference, but does not get into the game of quality control on the work.
[11:50:58] Matthew leaves the room
[11:51:03] Matthew joins the room
[11:51:21] Trent Adams_web_491 joins the room
[11:54:00] <Pete Resnick_web_573> I think the concern is that Spec Required requires an expert to approve.
[11:54:14] <Dave Crocker_web_801> //sorry. I mis-remembered spec required. Given the choices, FCFS should apply.  Yes, that can produce useless registration.  That is too bad for what is being registered, but doesn't hurt general SMTP use.
[11:54:17] Simon Romano_web_115 joins the room
[11:54:32] <Murray Kucherawy_web_399> Pete: Why's that bad?
[11:54:36] <Todd Herr_web_105> @Pete - True, but Barry just volunteered to be that expert
[11:54:57] <John Levine_web_192> I'll be co-expert if people want
[11:55:06] <Dave Crocker_web_801> @murray, it's bad because it imposes a significantly higher barrier in effort and time.
[11:55:41] <Pete Resnick_web_573> I tend to agree with Dave on this. Expert review takes time and some justification
[11:58:11] <Dave Crocker_web_801> I don't understand what 'mess' John is concerned about.
[11:59:34] <Dave Crocker_web_801> Someone registers a name that is, for whatever reason, ultimately useless.  So what?
[12:01:13] <Murray Kucherawy_web_399> I agree with the point about media types.  We'd rather have some crazy idea registered with documentation than not registered.
[12:01:26] <Pete Resnick_web_573> People can be dopes if they want to. We only want to make sure they have the opportunity not to be dopes.
[12:03:15] <Pete Resnick_web_573> 04:30. Ugh.
[12:03:41] <Murray Kucherawy_web_399> How is he a half hour behind me?
[12:03:54] <Todd Herr_web_105> California is a big state
[12:03:58] <Pete Resnick_web_573> heh
[12:05:33] <John C Klensin> Then one provides provisional registration that gets the name into the registry and allows the registrant 60 days to listen to discussion and amend things before the registration semi-automatically becomes permanent
[12:05:48] Christian Veenman_web_134 joins the room
[12:06:41] <Dave Crocker_web_801> @murray, my body isn't a half-hour behind.  My brain is.  You referenced 4:30, so I did too.  I'll probably still say 4:30 later this morning.
[12:07:52] <Murray Kucherawy_web_399> I sympathize.  I just had to get three different ADs to explain to me the concept of network ossification.
[12:09:06] Lee-Berkeley Shaw_web_947 joins the room
[12:10:25] Alessandro Amirante_web_158 joins the room
[12:10:58] <Bron Gondwana_web_626> we can always fix this later right?  If the registry gets filled with shit, we can do an IETF consensus document to change the registry and clean out the nonsense
[12:11:22] <Dave Crocker_web_801> @bron: +1
[12:11:26] <Bron Gondwana_web_626> and if it doesn't, we've avoided red tape and extra work for IANA
[12:11:58] <John C Klensin> I'm having trouble hearing barry
[12:12:21] <Bron Gondwana_web_626> asking IANA to post to the list makes sense to me
[12:12:49] <Pete Resnick_web_573> My apologies for being overly loud to interrupt Barry. Unintentional, but no good nonetheless.
[12:13:03] <Bron Gondwana_web_626> IANA are competent and reliable
[12:13:54] <Dave Crocker_web_801> The nature of FCFS is well-understood.  Although perhaps a 'bigger' change, it fixes the problem.  Anything else doesn't.
[12:15:28] <Pete Resnick_web_573> Specification Required is less change than FCFS, which would lean in favor of that. But I still favor FCFS.
[12:15:38] <Bron Gondwana_web_626> I can't reliably talk, but I'm right here with Dave.  Let's just FCFS
[12:16:20] <John C Klensin> @Bron: if our goal is to be sure that a given keyword is not used in different ways by different actors (except maliciously),  thjere is no cleaning.
[12:17:17] <John C Klensin> @meetecho: volume coming from room seems to be very low compared to remote participants.  I can hear, but just barely
[12:17:25] Alessandro Amirante_web_158 leaves the room
[12:17:41] <Meetecho> We're monitoring but they seem comparable to us, maybe it's some specific speakers?
[12:17:46] <Pete Resnick_web_573> I'm so proud of my mentee for feeling he can go to the mic. :slightly_smiling_face:
[12:17:56] <Dave Crocker_web_801> @meetecho, the issue is the room mic.  The leader table mic seems loud enough.
[12:17:59] <Meetecho> That said, we're trying not to boost local mics too much as they may generate feedback when remotes speak
[12:18:17] Bron Gondwana_web_626 leaves the room
[12:18:17] <Meetecho> Mh maybe it's running out of juice?
[12:18:24] <Dave Crocker_web_801> @meetech, well, yeah, there's that.
[12:18:42] <Joris Baum_web_906> @meetecho: everything seems fine to me
[12:18:43] <Murray Kucherawy_web_399> I am so tempted to register the BADIDEA extension now.
[12:18:55] <Meetecho> Heading there to check
[12:19:38] <Francesca Palombini_web_367> or just switch the queue mic with the presenter mic?
[12:19:48] Lee-Berkeley Shaw_web_947 leaves the room
[12:19:57] <Dave Crocker_web_801> @murray, please do.  A reliable way to reduce excessive fear is 'mere exposure' (which is actually a formal psych term.)
[12:20:09] <Meetecho> We're going to the room to see if we can boost just the queue line mic for remotes a bit
[12:21:22] <Murray Kucherawy_web_399> @Dave: You won't like what the extension does. ;)
[12:21:47] <Meetecho> Barry sounded fine to us
[12:21:51] <John C Klensin> Alexey +1
[12:22:00] <Dave Crocker_web_801> @murray, it will be a trivial addition to the list of what I don't like.
[12:22:20] <Dave Crocker_web_801> @murray, and yes, I'm fine with your treating that as a challenge.
[12:22:34] Bron Gondwana_web_692 joins the room
[12:22:48] <Murray Kucherawy_web_399> 451 Your first reply can't be trusted; please try again.
[12:22:52] <Bron Gondwana_web_692> sorry I lost network for a while
[12:23:21] <Murray Kucherawy_web_399> Anyone remember why VRFY was mandatory originally?
[12:23:58] <Pete Resnick_web_573> Easiest to move discussion to A/S. I'm OK with minimal change.
[12:24:29] <John C Klensin> Murray: yes, I remember.  Don't want to take time today
[12:24:56] <Murray Kucherawy_web_399> John: Don't need the whole history, but is that logic still valid?
[12:25:25] <Dave Crocker_web_801> Do we know of current operational problems involving VRFY?  If not, then the concern is for 'improvement' rather than 'repair' to the spec.
[12:27:05] <Bron Gondwana_web_692> Dave: argument for removal of something not used is "less work for implementing"
[12:27:40] <Dave Crocker_web_801> @todd: +1
[12:27:50] <Pete Resnick_web_573> I prefer no change in the doc and move any new discussion needed to A/S.
[12:28:53] Bron Gondwana_web_692 leaves the room
[12:28:57] Bron Gondwana_web_517 joins the room
[12:29:14] <Dave Crocker_web_801> @bron, yes, but... that's a reasonable 'improvement' line of argument, but risks unintended consequences.  The nature of the current effort is supposed to be more constrained than that.
[12:29:39] Bron Gondwana_web_517 leaves the room
[12:30:38] <Dave Crocker_web_801> Does this 3.3 text cause known problems?
[12:31:08] <Dave Crocker_web_801> That said, what does it mean for software to 'assume' anything?
[12:32:44] Bron Gondwana_web_225 joins the room
[12:34:02] <John C Klensin> I don't know any such problems
[12:34:40] <John C Klensin> I think we have consensus that this is a lousy piece of text
[12:34:47] <Pete Resnick_web_573> heh
[12:35:26] <Pete Resnick_web_573> Yeah, it's not clear that the sentences in this paragraph have much to do with eachother.
[12:35:32] <John Levine_web_192> ok with dropping it
[12:35:35] <Kenneth Murchison_web_765> +1 to dropping it
[12:36:32] <Pete Resnick_web_573> @John: If we can't figure out what it was meant to do, do you prefer drop or just leave it?
[12:36:37] <Dave Crocker_web_801> Clarification invites new problems.  Dropping /might/ invite problems, but we don't know what problem the text is fixing AND we don't like the current text.
[12:36:49] <Dave Crocker_web_801> +1 to dropping.
[12:37:12] <Murray Kucherawy_web_399> You know, I'd like to capture the discussion about registry rules someplace and apply it if we update 6838.  How many other WGs have had that same discussion?
[12:37:23] <Murray Kucherawy_web_399> wait that's media types, make that 8126
[12:38:16] <Bron Gondwana_web_225> Murray: +1, I'm sure many WGs have had this disucssion
[12:38:39] <John Levine_web_192> ok
[12:38:56] <John Levine_web_192> rhymes with green, not with whine
[12:39:51] <John Levine_web_192> The paragraph suggests it's about source routes
[12:41:16] <John C Klensin> @John lhanks.
[12:43:38] <Pete Resnick_web_573> So "leave it alone" lands on 550?
[12:43:43] <John Levine_web_192> yes
[12:43:51] <Pete Resnick_web_573> Cool.
[12:44:05] <Pete Resnick_web_573> Sounds like no change it is.
[12:47:12] <Murray Kucherawy_web_399> Can a "FOR" clause include multiple addresses?
[12:47:46] <Pete Resnick_web_573> I think text for A/S is more likely than really needing a change in base.
[12:47:51] <Pete Resnick_web_573> Happy to help either way.
[12:48:27] <Kenneth Murchison_web_765> Pete is you have suggested text for A/S that would be great
[12:48:30] <John Levine_web_192> @murray allows only one address
[12:49:35] Christian Veenman_web_134 leaves the room
[12:50:55] <Pete Resnick_web_573> Yeah, this part people have actually had trouble with. We need to clarify.
[12:51:53] <Dave Crocker_web_801> 1. SMTP does not get to dictate what list exploder do, since their activity is quite long after message delivery.
[12:52:15] <Dave Crocker_web_801> 2. Do we have documentation of a significant operation problem that making a change here will fix?
[12:53:59] <Pete Resnick_web_573> +1 to Barry.
[12:55:00] <John C Klensin> The problem is not exploders in the post-delivery context that Dave is talking about.   It is far more important for alias-type changes.
[12:55:56] <Pete Resnick_web_573> @Dave: But that *would* be a significant change to text that people do use.
[12:56:13] <John C Klensin> @Pete +1
[12:56:30] <Pete Resnick_web_573> If we're going to discuss aliases/lists at all (and that is a separate discussion), I'm inclined to clarify the text.
[12:57:01] <Dave Crocker_web_801> @pete, any change is... change.  Dropping bad text is arguably less change than replacing it with new (and therefore untested) text that might create new problems, especially here where it is far beyond SMTP's scope.
[12:57:29] <Pete Resnick_web_573> (The result of the other ticket might be to rip this and other text out, but as I said, that's separate.)
[12:58:25] <Pete Resnick_web_573> Dropping bad text is sometimes better, sometimes not. *That* is something that we have to make a judgement on.
[12:58:35] <John C Klensin> But, Dave, the assertion that it is beyond SMTP's scope when it has been considered within scope for 30 years, is, itself, a rather significant change.
[12:59:10] <Pete Resnick_web_573> (Sorry, I leave myself standing in line too often.)
[12:59:53] <John C Klensin> Agree with Pete that further discussion may lead to talking it out, but I don't think an out of scope argument is helpful here.
[13:00:05] <Joris Baum_web_906> :grinning_face_with_star_eyes:
[13:00:46] <Pete Resnick_web_573> Pete groans loudly.
[13:01:21] Tobia Castaldi_web_870 joins the room
[13:02:11] Tobia Castaldi_web_870 leaves the room
[13:02:27] <Murray Kucherawy_web_399> You could add a sentence near the top that indicates this document uses "sender-SMTP" and "SMTP client" interchangeably, and change nothing else.
[13:02:43] <Barry Leiba_web_241> The Crocker Principle!
[13:02:56] <John C Klensin> +1 to Pete and, yes, I would personally favor that sentence.
[13:03:26] <John C Klensin> but I'm obviously willing to go a bit further in the direction of clarification than some others.
[13:03:35] <Murray Kucherawy_web_399> How did this get less discussion than FCFS?
[13:04:17] <Barry Leiba_web_241> FCFS = For C*s*ing F*'s Sake, no?
[13:04:36] <Alexey Melnikov_web_901> Murray: we are tired :-)
[13:04:42] <Alexey Melnikov_web_901> Which sometimes helps
[13:05:32] Trent Adams_web_491 leaves the room
[13:05:51] <Dave Crocker_web_801> Since 'server' seems to have become a socially insensitive term, sender/receiver is the socially safer choice.
[13:06:01] Trent Adams_web_654 joins the room
[13:06:19] <Pete Resnick_web_573> @Dave: I like that as a good argument for the A/S to commit to sender/receiver.
[13:07:32] <Pete Resnick_web_573> I have no objection to a simple clarification like Murray's suggestion.
[13:07:52] <Murray Kucherawy_web_399> Is it still 4:30, Dave?
[13:08:05] <John Levine_web_192> It's always 4:30 somewhere
[13:08:54] Trent Adams_web_654 leaves the room
[13:09:46] <Dave Crocker_web_801> @murray, after two triple espressos, I think it is at least 4:45.
[13:10:04] <Murray Kucherawy_web_399> How's the view from the ceiling?
[13:10:08] <Pete Resnick_web_573> Does time speed up or slow down with triple espressos?
[13:10:18] <Murray Kucherawy_web_399> I think it causes Doppler shifts.
[13:11:13] <Dave Crocker_web_801> @murray, you are assuming a degree of effect that is not assured -- and did not happen -- at 4:30, nor at 4:45.
[13:12:06] <John C Klensin> @Alexey:  ROFL
[13:12:27] <Pete Resnick_web_573> (Murray, who hasn't turned on his video, must still be in his PJs.)
[13:12:42] <Barry Leiba_web_241> You assume he wars them...
[13:12:44] <Murray Kucherawy_web_399> Yeah, you don't get my camera on when I've been in meetings since 2am.
[13:12:46] <Barry Leiba_web_241> wears
[13:12:50] <Pete Resnick_web_573> It's Hans-Jörg at the mic.
[13:12:58] <Benson Muite_web_646> Thanks for the educational discussion.
[13:13:48] <Murray Kucherawy_web_399> It's a local... right.
[13:13:56] <Dave Crocker_web_801> SMTP is not supposed to interpret the left-hand side.
[13:13:57] <Todd Herr_web_105> "sub addressing"?
[13:13:59] <Murray Kucherawy_web_399> On the other hand it might be helpful to document someplace.
[13:14:09] <John Levine_web_192> todd+ietf@example.com
[13:14:14] <Todd Herr_web_105> thanks
[13:14:23] <Murray Kucherawy_web_399> Thanks all.
[13:14:34] <Joris Baum_web_906> thanks!
[13:14:46] <John C Klensin> Barry +1
[13:14:47] <Pete Resnick_web_573> Travel well all who are traveling. Good rest to all the rest.
[13:14:55] Murray Kucherawy_web_399 leaves the room
[13:14:55] <John Levine_web_192> zzzzzzzzz
[13:15:06] John Levine_web_192 leaves the room
[13:15:11] Francesca Palombini_web_367 leaves the room
[13:15:13] Benson Muite_web_646 leaves the room
[13:15:15] Francesca Palombini_web_562 joins the room
[13:15:20] James Galvin_web_641 leaves the room
[13:15:20] Pete Resnick_web_573 leaves the room
[13:15:21] <Alexey Melnikov_web_901> Thank you all
[13:15:34] Alexey Melnikov_web_901 leaves the room
[13:15:39] Dave Crocker_web_801 leaves the room
[13:15:45] <John C Klensin> zzzzzz indeed.  And good travels to those of you who are in vienna
[13:16:28] Todd Herr_web_105 leaves the room
[13:16:29] Barry Leiba_web_241 leaves the room
[13:16:31] <John C Klensin> And I'd love to know what Barry is discussing with some animation :-)
[13:16:39] Joris Baum_web_906 leaves the room
[13:16:39] Kazunori Fujiwara_web_481 leaves the room
[13:16:39] Hans-Jörg Happel_web_705 leaves the room
[13:16:39] Kenneth Murchison_web_765 leaves the room
[13:16:39] John Klensin_web_890 leaves the room
[13:16:39] Simon Romano_web_115 leaves the room
[13:16:39] Bron Gondwana_web_225 leaves the room
[13:16:39] Francesca Palombini_web_562 leaves the room
[13:16:39] Rumen Donchev_web_939 leaves the room
[13:16:42] Meetecho leaves the room
[13:17:33] John C Klensin leaves the room