Re: draft minutes at San Francisco meeting

[Dave Crocker <dhc@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Tamura-san,

The notes look excellent.

I suggest a few, small changes:

HT> 7 SMTP Service Extension for Content Negotiation (ESMTP-CONNEG)
...
HT> The new ESMTP extension CONPERM is introduced: the i-fax machine allows
HT> the first MTA in the chain to perform conversion on its behalf,
HT> after negotiation (using CONNEG) was done.

it might be worth mentioning the concept of an i-fax machine, as
discussed in the appendix.  in the main part of the specification, for
CONPERM, we probably need to avoid the term.  Instead I think we should
use originator, recipient, sending MTA and receiving MTA.

Also, CONPERM applies to each sending MTA in a transmission sequence,
not only the first.  So I suggest your above sentence be modified to:

... is introduced: CONPERM allows the originator to pass conversion
permission to sending MTAs in the email relaying sequence. When a
sending MTA then receives CONNEG information about the recipient, it may
perform a conversion.


d/
--
 Dave Crocker <mailto:dcrocker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
 Brandenburg InternetWorking <http://www.brandenburg.com>
 Sunnyvale, CA  USA <tel:+1.408.246.8253>, <fax:+1.866.358.5301>