SMTP 521 Reply Code
draft-klensin-smtp-521code-00
This document is an Internet-Draft (I-D).
Anyone may submit an I-D to the IETF.
This I-D is not endorsed by the IETF and has no formal standing in the
IETF standards process.
The information below is for an old version of the document.
| Document | Type |
This is an older version of an Internet-Draft that was ultimately published as RFC 7504.
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Author | Dr. John C. Klensin | ||
| Last updated | 2014-08-20 | ||
| RFC stream | (None) | ||
| Formats | |||
| Reviews |
GENART IETF Last Call review
(of
-05)
by Joel Halpern
Ready w/issues
|
||
| Stream | Stream state | (No stream defined) | |
| Consensus boilerplate | Unknown | ||
| RFC Editor Note | (None) | ||
| IESG | IESG state | Became RFC 7504 (Proposed Standard) | |
| Telechat date | (None) | ||
| Responsible AD | (None) | ||
| Send notices to | (None) |
draft-klensin-smtp-521code-00
Network Working Group J.C. Klensin
Internet-Draft August 20, 2014
Updates: 1846, 5321 (if approved)
Intended status: Standards Track
Expires: February 19, 2015
SMTP 521 Reply Code
draft-klensin-smtp-521code-00.txt
Abstract
This memo defines a new Simple Mail Transfer Protocol (SMTP) reply
code, 521. That code may be used to indicate that an Internet host
does not accept incoming mail.
Status of this Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
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."
This Internet-Draft will expire on February 19, 2015.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2014 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (http://trustee.ietf.org/
license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document.
Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights
and restrictions with respect to this document. Code Components
extracted from this document must include Simplified BSD License text
as described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are
provided without warranty as described in the Simplified BSD License.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
3. The 521 Reply Code . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
4. Small details to avoid loose ends . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Klensin Expires February 19, 2015 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft SMTP 521 Reply Code August 2014
4.1. Specific changes to RFC 5321 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
4.2. The RFC 1846 Experiment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
6. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
7. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
7.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
7.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Appendix A. Change Log . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1. Introduction
The SMTP specification [RFC5321] (referred to, along with its various
updates, as "SMTP" below) contains a list and discussion of error
codes. This document updates that list with a new code, 521, for use
in response to an initial connection. In that context, it
specifically denotes a system that does not receive email or
otherwise handle SMTP mail or inquiry transactions. That code
differs from the use of reply code 554, recommended by RFC 5321,
because the latter code can be used in a larger variety of
situations, including mail that is not accepted for, or from,
particular sources, destinations, or addresses.
This specification updates RFC 5321 to add the new 521 code. That
code was first formally proposed in the Experimental RFC 1846
[RFC1846]; this document updates that specification to standardize
the code and provide more specific treatment of it.
The reader of this document is expected to have reasonable
familiarity with the SMTP specification in RFC 5321, particularly its
discussion of reply codes and their use and theory.
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119].
2. Background
Many Internet hosts are not in a position -- whether technically,
operationally, or administratively-- to offer email service. If an
SMTP client (sender) attempts to open a mail connection to a system
that does not have an SMTP server, the connection attempt will time
out. SMTP requires that timeouts result in the client queuing the
message and retrying it for an extended period. That behavior will
result in wasted resources and long delays in getting an error
message back to its originator.
An alternative is to run a dummy SMTP server on hosts that do not
receive mail under any circumstances, having that dummy server return
a fatal error reply code in response to any connection-opening
attempt. This document specifies a reply code to be used for that
purpose.
3. The 521 Reply Code
Klensin Expires February 19, 2015 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft SMTP 521 Reply Code August 2014
This specification adds the 521 reply code to the repertoire
specified in SMTP, reserving it for use at connection-opening time to
indicate that the host does not accept email under any circumstances.
It SHOULD be used for dummy SMTP servers whose sole purpose is to
notify systems that attempt to open mail connections that the host
never accepts mail. It MAY be used in other situations where the
intent is to indicate that the host never accepts email. It SHOULD
NOT be used for situations in which the server rejects mail from
particular hosts or addresses or in which mail for a particular
destination host is not accepted; as discussed in SMTP, reply code
554 is more appropriate for those conditions.
The preferred message to accompany a 521 code is "Host does not
accept mail".
Once the 521 reply code is returned instead of the usual 220, the
SMTP session proceeds normally. If the SMTP client attempts to send
additional commands other than QUIT, the Server MAY either continue
sending 521 reply codes or simply close the connection. If the
purpose of running a dummy SMTP server that returns a 521 code is to
conserve resources, the latter will usually be preferable.
4. Small details to avoid loose ends
4.1. Specific changes to RFC 5321
This document adds the 521 code, with message "Host does not accept
mail" to the function group and numerical lists (Sections 4.2.2 and
4.2.3 respectively) of RFC 5321. It also adds the 521 code to the
"CONNECTION ESTABLISHMENT" portion of Section 4.3.2 ("Command-Reply
Sequences"), preceding the 554 code.
4.2. The RFC 1846 Experiment
By formalizing Response Code 521, this specification ends the
experiment proposed in RFC 1846. That document also discusses
general strategies for hosts that do not accept mail directly. That
discussion is out of scope for the present document.
5. Security Considerations
Not running any SMTP server, or running an SMTP server which simply
emits fixed strings in response to incoming connections, should
provide significantly fewer opportunities for security problems than
running a complete SMTP implementation.
6. Acknowledgments
Alain Durand and Francis Dupont proposed the 521 code in RFC 1846
[RFC1846]. They also participated in an extended conversation and
provided many useful comments that led to this document. The
document also contains, with their permission, some text copied from
that early specification.
Klensin Expires February 19, 2015 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft SMTP 521 Reply Code August 2014
Discussion of the "null MX" approach and proposal [nullMX] inspired
the creation of this specification.
7. References
7.1. Normative References
[1] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
[2] Klensin, J., "Simple Mail Transfer Protocol", RFC 5321,
October 2008.
7.2. Informative References
[1] Durand, A. and F. Dupont, "SMTP 521 Reply Code", RFC 1846,
September 1995.
[2] Levine, J. and M. Delany, "A "Null MX" No Service Resource
Record for Domains that Accept No Mail", August 2014,
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-appsawg-
nullmx/>.
Appendix A. Change Log
RFC Editor: Please remove this appendix before publication..
This Internet Draft is the successor to draft-klensin-rfc1846bis-00.
That document was an attempt to completely update and replace RFC
1846. That effort led to the conclusion that it would be better to
focus narrowly on the 521 code, leaving a more general treatment of
hosts that do not receive mail to a separate replacement for RFC 1846
and/or an update to RFC 5321.
Author's Address
John C Klensin
1770 Massachusetts Ave, Ste 322
Cambridge, MA 02140
USA
Phone: +1 617 245 1457
Email: john-ietf@jck.com
Klensin Expires February 19, 2015 [Page 4]