Review of draft-klensin-smtp-521code-05
Suzanne Woolf <suzworldwide <at> gmail.com>
2015-04-08 12:35:17 GMT
As the boilerplate sez….I have reviewed this document as part of the Operational directorate's
ongoing effort to review all IETF documents being processed by the IESG. These
comments were written with the intent of improving the operational aspects of the
IETF drafts. Comments that are not addressed in last call may be included in AD reviews
during the IESG review. Document editors and WG chairs should treat these comments
just like any other last call comments.
(With apologies to the author and my ADs that it's late; I read the draft and then spaced actually shipping
the review after Dallas.)
This is ready to go, with some editorial nits (below).
The IETF Last Call had a few comments, mostly on a specific clarification; they were supportive of
publication. There is a fairly lengthy and substantial comment from Murray Kucherawy that it appears
John agreed to incorporate in the next rev, explaining a little more closely the relationship between
what this draft suggests and RFC 5321 regarding dropped connections. I thought Murray's explanation of
his suggestion was compelling enough that I'd like to see the change incorporated.
(I was also surprised that "This document updates RFC 5321 to add descriptions and text for two reply codes,
but there is no registry for those codes." The workaround looks OK to me from an operational perspective
but I'm not an SMTP implementer.)
This document is a useful update to the standard to support some elements of current practice and at least
one expected separate update also reflecting practice in the field (nullMX).