[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: SMTP traffic control
I don't think I'm squashing such an idea (standardization is usually beneficial). I'm more asking, IF we standardize what benefits do we expect given that many large ISPs do provide much of the feedback (just not in a standardized format)?
The question you asked at the end of your email is substantively different from my interpretation of the thread previously, so let me try to answer it: Most ISPs I'm familiar with are conveying the information through an over-use (perhaps "abuse") of 4xy errors, where several return codes may require reading the plain-text content to discern the variations in the responses.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Murray S. Kucherawy" <msk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: "ietf-smtp@xxxxxxx" <ietf-smtp@xxxxxxx>
Sent: 10/24/2011 2:04 PM
Subject: RE: SMTP traffic control
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rosenwald, Jordan [mailto:Jordan_Rosenwald@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Monday, October 24, 2011 4:16 AM
> To: Murray S. Kucherawy; ietf-smtp@xxxxxxx
> Subject: RE: SMTP traffic control
> I know most major ISPs already provide that kind of data. It's not
> difficult with existing response codes. Granted they're not in a
> standard format (across ISPs). Given that any sender could mimic the
> types of response codes the ISPs are using, but haven't, what level of
> success can we really expect after a standardization effort?
I'm confused: Senders are clients, not servers, so what response codes are they providing?
I think the proposal is to try to standardize what various servers are doing in the area of expressing retry or rate policy so that clients can comply universally rather than having to understand different syntaxes for different servers. That seems like it can only be a benefit, as long as some critical mass of servers intend to adopt it. And that, to me, is the real question.
How are the ISPs you know about conveying this information to clients at large?