Because I saw support from people like Alessandro Vesely for my proposal. https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf-smtp/pSb216OGLuTe31yUzAXtqD2haAo
Then it hit me. Maybe more people like him interested in SMTPS too. So I have done some research and posted this comment. https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf-smtp/apZ8nBnGpv1aXlFUtbcTjGipA8Q When I open this thread, I just wanted to make sure we are all on the same page. I think I even mentioned what IETF thinks when I created this thread. And asked "I would love to know where you stand on this proposal." So I opened this thread, just to collect some feedback. On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 8:45 PM Doug Royer <[email protected]> wrote: > On 1/11/19 10:38 AM, Viruthagiri Thirumavalavan wrote: > > Hello NANOG, Belated new year wishes. > > > > I would like to gather some feedback from you all. > > > > I'm trying to propose two things to the Internet Standard and it's > > related to SMTP. > > Your post to this list was (according to the headers): > 11 Jan 2019 23:08:21 +0530 > > Yet on the IETF-smtp mailing list at: > Wed, 9 Jan 2019 12:29:43 +0530 > > *You* wrote (in part): > I'm the guy who proposed SMTP Over TLS on Port 26. Looks like that was > dead end. So, now coming with another proposal. > > Question: Why did you post something on NANOG that you already declared > to the IETF yourself as a "dead end" 2 days earlier? I read all of the > IETF emails on this idea. They explained why it is currently a > no-starter as proposed. > > -- > > Doug Royer - (http://DougRoyer.US http://goo.gl/yrxJTu ) > [email protected] > 714-989-6135 > > -- Best Regards, Viruthagiri Thirumavalavan Dombox, Inc.
