> On Fri, Dec 09, 2016 at 04:13:08PM -0000, John Levine wrote:
> > >What would (for example) be the result if a client requested both
> > >the REQUIRETLS and a separate MAYTLS feature?
> >
> > Given that mail servers will do whatever they wany with REQUIRETLS
> > suggestions, I wouldn't obsess about this.
> I'm trying, without much success it seems, to explain why REQUIRETLS is
> an incomplete take on the requirements for per-message TLS policy, and
> why fragmenting the solution over multiple specificaitons would be a bad
> idea.
> I am not too worried about what MTAs will or won't do with per-message
> REQUIRETLS, just pointing out non-orthogonal features which hint at the
> need for a single spec. I rather expect that the "require" side of the
> per-message policy will see exceedingly little use.
Yep. To the point where I cannot possibly justify implementing this proposal
unless it also includes the MAY option, which looks to me to be far more
useful.
Ned
_______________________________________________
Uta mailing list
Uta@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/uta
