Re: Fwd: Re: Last Call: 'Message Submission' to Draft Standard

On Wed, 16 Feb 2005, JFC (Jefsey) Morfin wrote:
>
> I have not the competence to fully understand if this concerns OPES/SMTP, but
> I think it does? John quotes OPES in the discussion.

Only for comparison, since both message submission and OPES may involve
message alteration. The main area of discussion was the introduction of a
distinction between pure SMTP (which in principle should be a clear
channel, but historically has not been) and message submission (which
involves a certain amount of limited message clean-up to enforce
standards compliance). OPES is orthogonal to this.

> All this, together with the current IDN security debate, etc. lead me to think
> that my interest in DN massaging is a key OPES issue and that the OPES/SMTP
> proper location is the UA "virtual" I/O, that is at the first (front-end) and
> at the last (back-end) MTA only, what simplifies our debate and makes it of
> immediate interest?

A lot of current SMTP filtering deployments occur at a site's border MTAs
or central relays, which are often a hop or two from any UA. It would be
foolish to limit OPES/SMTP to the submission or final delivery stages.

Tony.
-- 
f.a.n.finch  <[email protected]>  http://dotat.at/
NORTH FORELAND TO SELSEY BILL: NORTHEAST 4 OR 5 DECREASING 3, BECOMING
VARIABLE 3 OR LESS LATER WEATHER: SHOWERS AT FIRST. MAINLY GOOD. ROUGH
BECOMING MODERATE IN EAST; MODERATE BECOMING SLIGHT IN WEST.