draft-ietf-msgtrk-smtpext-03.txt   draft-ietf-msgtrk-smtpext-04.txt 
Internet Draft E. Allman Internet Draft E. Allman
draft-ietf-msgtrk-smtpext-03.txt Sendmail, Inc. draft-ietf-msgtrk-smtpext-04.txt Sendmail, Inc.
Valid for six months T. Hansen Valid for six months T. Hansen
Updates: RFC 1891 AT&T Laboratories Updates: RFC 1891 AT&T Laboratories
November 2, 2001 October 21, 2002
SMTP Service Extension SMTP Service Extension
for Message Tracking for Message Tracking
<draft-ietf-msgtrk-smtpext-03.txt> <draft-ietf-msgtrk-smtpext-04.txt>
Status of This Memo Status of This Memo
This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance
with all provisions of Section 10 of RFC2026. Internet-Drafts are with all provisions of Section 10 of RFC2026. Internet-Drafts are
working documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), its working documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), its
areas, and its working groups. Note that other groups may also areas, and its working groups. Note that other groups may also
distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts. distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six
months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents
at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any
intellectual property or other rights that might be claimed to
pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in
this document or the extent to which any license under such rights
might or might not be available; neither does it represent that it has
made any effort to identify any such rights. Information on the
IETF's procedures with respect to rights in standards-track and
standards-related documentation can be found in BCP-11. Copies of
claims of rights made available for publication and any assurances of
licenses to be made available, or the result of an attempt made to
obtain a general license or permission for the use of such proprietary
rights by implementors or users of this specification can be obtained
from the IETF Secretariat.
The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention
any copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary
rights which may cover technology that may be required to practice
this standard. Please address the information to the IETF Executive
Director.
The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at: The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at:
http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt
The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at: The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at:
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html
This document is a submission by the MSGTRK Working Group of the This document is a submission by the MSGTRK Working Group of the
Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). Comments should be submitted Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). Comments should be submitted
to the ietf-msgtrk@imc.org mailing list. An archive of the mailing to the ietf-msgtrk@imc.org mailing list. An archive of the mailing
list may be found at list may be found at
http://www.imc.org/ietf-msgtrk/index.html http://www.imc.org/ietf-msgtrk/index.html
Distribution of this memo is unlimited. Distribution of this memo is unlimited.
1. Abstract 1. Abstract
skipping to change at page 2, line ? skipping to change at page 2, line ?
following service extension is hereby defined: following service extension is hereby defined:
(1) The name of the SMTP service extension is "Message (1) The name of the SMTP service extension is "Message
Tracking". Tracking".
(2) The EHLO keyword value associated with this extension is (2) The EHLO keyword value associated with this extension is
"MTRK". "MTRK".
(3) No parameters are allowed with this EHLO keyword value. (3) No parameters are allowed with this EHLO keyword value.
Future documents may extend this specification by specifying Future documents may extend this specification by specifying
options. parameters to this keyword value.
(4) One optional parameter using the keyword "MTRK" is added to (4) One optional parameter using the keyword "MTRK" is added to
the MAIL command. In addition, the ENVID parameter of the the MAIL command. In addition, the ENVID parameter of the
MAIL command (as defined in RFC 1891 sections 5.4) MUST be MAIL command (as defined in RFC 1891 sections 5.4) MUST be
supported, with extensions as described below. The ORCPT supported, with extensions as described below. The ORCPT
parameter of the RCPT command (as defined in RFC 1891 parameter of the RCPT command (as defined in RFC 1891
section 5.2) MUST also be supported. section 5.2) MUST also be supported. All semantics
associated with ENVID and ORCPT described in RFC 1891 MUST
be supported as part of this extension.
(5) The maximum length of a MAIL command line is increased by 40 (5) The maximum length of a MAIL command line is increased by 40
characters by the possible addition of the MTRK keyword and characters by the possible addition of the MTRK keyword and
value. Note that the 507 character extension of RCPT value. Note that the 507 character extension of RCPT
commands for the ORCPT parameter and the 107 character commands for the ORCPT parameter and the 107 character
extension of MAIL commands for the ENVID parameter as extension of MAIL commands for the ENVID parameter as
mandated by RFC 1891 [RFC-DSN-SMTP] must also be included. mandated by RFC 1891 [RFC-DSN-SMTP] must also be included.
(6) No SMTP verbs are defined by this extension. (6) No SMTP verbs are defined by this extension.
skipping to change at page 5, line 12 skipping to change at page 5, line 30
compliant mailers as the mail is transferred during regular hop- compliant mailers as the mail is transferred during regular hop-
to-hop transfers. If the "downstream" MTA is not MTRK- to-hop transfers. If the "downstream" MTA is not MTRK-
compliant, then the MTRK= parameter MUST be deleted. If the compliant, then the MTRK= parameter MUST be deleted. If the
downstream MTA is DSN-compliant, then the ENVID and ORCPT downstream MTA is DSN-compliant, then the ENVID and ORCPT
parameters MUST NOT be deleted. parameters MUST NOT be deleted.
If aliasing, forwarding, or other redirection of a If aliasing, forwarding, or other redirection of a
recipient occurs, and the result of the redirection is exactly recipient occurs, and the result of the redirection is exactly
one recipient, then the MTA SHOULD treat this as an ordinary one recipient, then the MTA SHOULD treat this as an ordinary
hop-to-hop transfer and forward the MTRK=, ENVID=, and ORCPT= hop-to-hop transfer and forward the MTRK=, ENVID=, and ORCPT=
values; these values MUST NOT be modified. values; these values MUST NOT be modified except for
decrementing the mtrk-timeout field of the MTRK= value, which
MUST be modified as described in section 4.1 above.
MTAs MUST NOT copy MTRK certifiers when a recipient is MTAs MUST NOT copy MTRK certifiers when a recipient is
aliased, forwarded, or otherwise redirected and the redirection aliased, forwarded, or otherwise redirected and the redirection
results in more than one recipient. However, an MTA MAY results in more than one recipient. However, an MTA MAY
designate one of the multiple recipients as the "primary" designate one of the multiple recipients as the "primary"
recipient to which tracking requests shall be forwarded; other recipient to which tracking requests shall be forwarded; other
addresses MUST NOT receive tracking certifiers. MTAs MUST NOT addresses MUST NOT receive tracking certifiers. MTAs MUST NOT
forward MTRK certifiers when doing mailing list expansion. forward MTRK certifiers when doing mailing list expansion.
5. Security Issues 5. Security Considerations
5.1. Denial of service 5.1. Denial of service
An attacker could attempt to flood the database of a server An attacker could attempt to flood the database of a server
by submitting large numbers of small, tracked messages. In this by submitting large numbers of small, tracked messages. In this
case, a site may elect to lower its maximum retention period case, a site may elect to lower its maximum retention period
retroactively. retroactively.
5.2. Confidentiality 5.2. Confidentiality
skipping to change at page 6, line 5 skipping to change at page 6, line 25
``postmaster'' or ``webmaster'' as aliases may not wish to ``postmaster'' or ``webmaster'' as aliases may not wish to
expose the identity of those individuals by permitting tracking expose the identity of those individuals by permitting tracking
through those aliases. In other cases, providing the tracking through those aliases. In other cases, providing the tracking
information for an alias is important, such as when the alias information for an alias is important, such as when the alias
points to the user's preferred public address. points to the user's preferred public address.
Therefore, implementors are encouraged to provide Therefore, implementors are encouraged to provide
mechanisms by which site administrators can choose between these mechanisms by which site administrators can choose between these
alternatives. alternatives.
6. Acknowledgements 6. IANA Considerations
IANA is to register the SMTP extension defined in section 3.
7. Acknowledgements
Several individuals have commented on and enhanced this draft, Several individuals have commented on and enhanced this draft,
including Philip Hazel, Alexey Melnikov, Lyndon Nerenberg, Chris including Philip Hazel, Alexey Melnikov, Lyndon Nerenberg, Chris
Newman, and Gregory Neil Shapiro. Newman, and Gregory Neil Shapiro.
7. References 8. Normative References
[DRAFT-MTRK-MODEL] [DRAFT-MTRK-MODEL]
T. Hansen, ``Message Tracking Model and Requirements.'' T. Hansen, ``Message Tracking Model and Requirements.''
draft-ietf-msgtrk-model-03.txt. November 2000. draft-ietf-msgtrk-model-03.txt. November 2000.
[DRAFT-MTRK-MTQP] [DRAFT-MTRK-MTQP]
T. Hansen, ``Message Tracking Query Protocol.'' draft-ietf- T. Hansen, ``Message Tracking Query Protocol.'' draft-ietf-
msgtrk-mtqp-01.txt. November 2000. msgtrk-mtqp-01.txt. November 2000.
[RFC-ABNF] [RFC-ABNF]
Crocker, D., Editor, and P. Overell, ``Augmented BNF for Crocker, D., Editor, and P. Overell, ``Augmented BNF for
Syntax Specifications: ABNF'', RFC 2234, November 1997. Syntax Specifications: ABNF'', RFC 2234, November 1997.
[RFC-DELIVERYBY]
D. Newman, ``Deliver By SMTP Service Extension.'' RFC 2852.
June 2000.
[RFC-DSN-REPT]
G. Vaudreuil, ``The Multipart/Report Content Type for the
Reporting of Mail System Administrative Messages.'' RFC 1892.
January 1996.
[RFC-DSN-SMTP]
K. Moore, ``SMTP Service Extension for Delivery Status
Notifications.'' RFC 1891. January 1996.
[RFC-DSN-STAT]
K. Moore and G. Vaudreuil, ``An Extensible Message Format for
Delivery Status Notifications.'' RFC 1894. January 1996.
[RFC-EMSSC]
G. Vaudreuil, ``Enhanced Mail System Status Codes.'' RFC
1893. January 1996.
[RFC-ESMTP] [RFC-ESMTP]
Rose, M., Stefferud, E., Crocker, D., Klensin, J. and N. Rose, M., Stefferud, E., Crocker, D., Klensin, J. and N.
Freed, ``SMTP Service Extensions.'' STD 10, RFC 1869. Freed, ``SMTP Service Extensions.'' STD 10, RFC 1869.
November 1995. November 1995.
[RFC-KEYWORDS] [RFC-KEYWORDS]
S. Bradner, ``Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate S. Bradner, ``Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels.'' RFC 2119. March 1997. Requirement Levels.'' RFC 2119. March 1997.
[RFC-MDN]
R. Fajman, ``An Extensible Message Format for Message
Disposition Notifications.'' RFC 2298. March 1998.
[RFC-MIME] [RFC-MIME]
N. Freed and N. Borenstein, ``Multipurpose Internet Mail N. Freed and N. Borenstein, ``Multipurpose Internet Mail
Extensions (MIME) Part One: Format of Internet Message Extensions (MIME) Part One: Format of Internet Message
Bodies.'' RFC 2045. November 1996. Bodies.'' RFC 2045. November 1996.
[RFC-MSGFMT]
P. Resnick, editor, ``Internet Message Format.'' RFC 2822.
April 2001.
[RFC-RANDOM]
D. Eastlake, S. Crocker, and J. Schiller, ``Randomness
Recommendations for Security.'' RFC 1750. December 1994.
[RFC-RELATED]
E. Levinson, ``The MIME Multipart/Related Content-type.'' RFC
2387. August 1998.
[NIST-SHA1] [NIST-SHA1]
NIST FIPS PUB 180-1, ``Secure Hash Standard.'' National NIST FIPS PUB 180-1, ``Secure Hash Standard.'' National
Institute of Standards and Technology, U.S. Department of Institute of Standards and Technology, U.S. Department of
Commerce. May 1994. DRAFT. Commerce. May 1994. DRAFT.
[RFC-SMTP] [RFC-SMTP]
J. Klensin, editor, ``Simple Mail Transfer Protocol.'' RFC J. Klensin, editor, ``Simple Mail Transfer Protocol.'' RFC
2821. April 2001. 2821. April 2001.
8. Authors' Addresses 9. Informational References
[RFC-DELIVERYBY]
D. Newman, ``Deliver By SMTP Service Extension.'' RFC 2852.
June 2000.
[RFC-DSN-SMTP]
K. Moore, ``SMTP Service Extension for Delivery Status
Notifications.'' RFC 1891. January 1996.
[RFC-MDN]
R. Fajman, ``An Extensible Message Format for Message
Disposition Notifications.'' RFC 2298. March 1998.
[RFC-RANDOM]
D. Eastlake, S. Crocker, and J. Schiller, ``Randomness
Recommendations for Security.'' RFC 1750. December 1994.
10. Authors' Addresses
Eric Allman Eric Allman
Sendmail, Inc. Sendmail, Inc.
6425 Christie Ave, 4th Floor 6425 Christie Ave, 4th Floor
Emeryville, CA 94608 Emeryville, CA 94608
U.S.A. U.S.A.
E-Mail: eric@Sendmail.COM E-Mail: eric@Sendmail.COM
Phone: +1 510 594 5501 Phone: +1 510 594 5501
Fax: +1 510 594 5429 Fax: +1 510 594 5429
Tony Hansen Tony Hansen
AT&T Laboratories AT&T Laboratories
Lincroft, NJ 07738 Middletown, NJ 07748
U.S.A. U.S.A.
Phone: +1 732 576 3207 Phone: +1 732 420 8934
E-Mail: tony@att.com E-Mail: tony@att.com
 End of changes. 17 change blocks. 
50 lines changed or deleted 58 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.34. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/