Skip to main content

ESMTP and LMTP Transmission Types Registration
draft-newman-esmtpsa-01

The information below is for an old version of the document that is already published as an RFC.
Document Type
This is an older version of an Internet-Draft that was ultimately published as RFC 3848.
Author Chris Newman
Last updated 2015-10-14 (Latest revision 2003-08-19)
RFC stream Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF)
Intended RFC status Draft Standard
Formats
Stream WG state (None)
Document shepherd (None)
IESG IESG state Became RFC 3848 (Draft Standard)
Action Holders
(None)
Consensus boilerplate Unknown
Telechat date (None)
Responsible AD Alexey Melnikov
IESG note ** No value found for 'doc.notedoc.note' **
Send notices to (None)
draft-newman-esmtpsa-01
Network Working Group                                          C. Newman
Internet-Draft                                          Sun Microsystems
Expires: February 16, 2004                               August 18, 2003

             ESMTP and LMTP Transmission Types Registration
                      draft-newman-esmtpsa-01.txt

Status of this Memo

   This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance with
   all provisions of Section 10 of RFC2026.

   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
   Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that other
   groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts.

   Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
   and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
   time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
   material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."

   The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at http://
   www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt.

   The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
   http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.

   This Internet-Draft will expire on February 16, 2004.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2003). All Rights Reserved.

Abstract

   This registers seven new mail transmission types (ESMTPA, ESMTPS,
   ESMTPSA, LMTP, LMTPA, LMTPS, LMTPSA) for use in the "with" clause of
   a Received header in an Internet message.

1. IANA Considerations

   As directed by SMTP [2], IANA maintains a registry [7] of "WITH
   protocol types" for use in the "with" clause of the Received header
   in an Internet message.  This registry presently includes SMTP [6],
   and ESMTP [2]. This specification updates the registry as follows:

   o  The new keyword "ESMTPA" indicates the use of ESMTP when the SMTP
      AUTH [3] extension is also used and authentication is successfully

Newman                 Expires February 16, 2004                [Page 1]
Internet-Draft    ESMTP and LMTP Transmission Types Registration      August 2003

      achieved.

   o  The new keyword "ESMTPS" indicates the use of ESMTP when STARTTLS
      [1] is also successfully negotiated to provide a strong transport
      encryption layer.

   o  The new keyword "ESMTPSA" indicates the use of ESMTP when both
      STARTTLS and SMTP AUTH are successfully negotiated (the
      combination of ESMTPS and ESMTPA).

   o  The new keyword "LMTP" indicates the use of LMTP [4].

   o  The new keyword "LMTPA" indicates the use of LMTP when the SMTP
      AUTH extension is also used and authentication is successfully
      achieved.

   o  The new keyword "LMTPS" indicates the use of LMTP when STARTTLS is
      also successfully negotiated to provide a strong transport
      encryption layer.

   o  The new keyword "LMTPSA" indicates the use of LMTP when both
      STARTTLS and SMTP AUTH are successfully negotiated (the
      combination of LSMTPS and LSMTPA).

   o  The references for the ESMTP and SMTP entries in the registry
      should be updated to the latest specification [2] since both RFC
      821 and RFC 1869 are obsoleted by RFC 2821.

2. Implementation Experience

   The ESMTPA, ESMTPS and ESMTPSA keywords have been implemented in
   deployed email server software for several years and no problems have
   been reported with their use.

3. Security Considerations

   Use of these additional keywords provides trace information to
   indicate when various high-level security framing protocols are used
   for hop-to-hop transport of email without exposing details of the
   specifics of the security mechanism.  This trace information provides
   an informal way to track the deployment of these mechanisms on the
   Internet and can assist after-the-fact diagnosis of email abuse.

   These keywords are not normally protected in transport which means
   they can be modified by an active attacker.  They also do not
   indicate the specifics of the mechanism used, and therefore do not
   provide any real-world security assurance.  As they are both cryptic

Newman                 Expires February 16, 2004                [Page 2]
Internet-Draft    ESMTP and LMTP Transmission Types Registration      August 2003

   and hidden in trace headers used primarily to diagnose email
   problems, it is not expected they will mislead end users with a false
   sense of security. Information with a higher degree of reliability
   can be obtained by correlating the Received headers with the logs of
   the various Mail Transfer Agents through which the message passed.

   The trace information provided by these keywords and other parts of
   the Received header provide a significant benefit when doing
   after-the-fact diagnosis of email abuse or problems.  Unfortunately,
   some people in a misguided attempt to hide information about their
   internal servers will strip Received headers of useful information
   and reduce their ability to correct security abuses after they
   happen.  The result of such misguided efforts is usually a reduction
   of the overall security of the systems.

Normative References

   [1]  Hoffman, P., "SMTP Service Extension for Secure SMTP over
        Transport Layer Security", RFC 3207, February 2002.

   [2]  Klensin, J., "Simple Mail Transfer Protocol", RFC 2821, April
        2001.

   [3]  Myers, J., "SMTP Service Extension for Authentication", RFC
        2554, March 1999.

   [4]  Myers, J., "Local Mail Transfer Protocol", RFC 2033, October
        1996.

Informative References

   [5]  Klensin, J., Freed, N., Rose, M., Stefferud, E. and D. Crocker,
        "SMTP Service Extensions", STD 10, RFC 1869, November 1995.

   [6]  Postel, J., "Simple Mail Transfer Protocol", STD 10, RFC 821,
        August 1982.

URIs

   [7]  <http://www.iana.org/assignments/mail-parameters>

Newman                 Expires February 16, 2004                [Page 3]
Internet-Draft    ESMTP and LMTP Transmission Types Registration      August 2003

Author's Address

   Chris Newman
   Sun Microsystems
   1050 Lakes Drive
   West Covina, CA  91790
   US

   EMail: chris.newman@sun.com

Newman                 Expires February 16, 2004                [Page 4]
Internet-Draft    ESMTP and LMTP Transmission Types Registration      August 2003

Intellectual Property Statement

   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.

Full Copyright Statement

   Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2003). All Rights Reserved.

   This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to
   others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it
   or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published
   and distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any
   kind, provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph are
   included on all such copies and derivative works. However, this
   document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by removing
   the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society or other
   Internet organizations, except as needed for the purpose of
   developing Internet standards in which case the procedures for
   copyrights defined in the Internet Standards process must be
   followed, or as required to translate it into languages other than
   English.

   The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not be
   revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or assignees.

   This document and the information contained herein is provided on an
   "AS IS" basis and THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING
   TASK FORCE DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING
   BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION

Newman                 Expires February 16, 2004                [Page 5]
Internet-Draft    ESMTP and LMTP Transmission Types Registration      August 2003

   HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF
   MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.

Acknowledgment

   Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the
   Internet Society.

Newman                 Expires February 16, 2004                [Page 6]