S Moonesamy wrote:
> 
> Martin Rex wrote:
> >
> > I believe it would be sensible to describe the desired authentication model
> > for MUA->MTA in more detail, beyond the mere reference of [SMTP-AUTH]
> > in section 4.3 of the current document:
> 
> The intent is to publish the document as a Full Standard.  As much as 
> it may be sensible to describe the desired authentication model, it 
> had to be shown that changes would contribute in a substantial and
> substantive way to the quality and comprehensibility of the
> specification as that was the guideline given to working group
> participants.  If you would like to recommend additional text,
> I suggest sending a message to the YAM mailing list.

It seems that I've been confused by the seperation of authentications
client->server and server->client into distinct protocol extensions,
i.e. SMTP-AUTH (rfc4954) for client->server, and the optional SMTP
service extension SMTP-TLS (STARTTLS, rfc3207) for server->client. 

The "mess" I was refering to is about the (factual lack of) server
endpoint identification in SMTP-TLS for the server->client authentication.

I'm sorry.

-Martin

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

Reply via email to