Date: Sun, 19 MaEMSD should be considered for use in a wireless network only if all EMSD email exchanged between the wireless network and the public Internet will transit an EMSD<->SMTP gateway between the two regions.

- Inadequate security

      The document specifies only clear-text passwords for
      authentication.  EMSD should be used across a wireless network
      only if sufficiently strong encryption is in use to protect the
      clear-text password.

   - Lack of character set internationalization

      EMSD has no provision for representation of characters outside of
      the ASCII repertoire or for language tags.

   - Poorly defined gatewaying to and from Internet Mail

      Because Internet Mail and EMSD have somewhat different and
      conflicting service models and different data models, mapping
      between them may provide good service only in limited cases, and
      this may cause operational problems.

   The IESG therefore recommends that EMSD deployment be limited to
   narrow circumstances, i.e., only to communicate with devices that
   have inherent limitations on the length and format of a message (no
   more than a few hundred bytes of ASCII text), using either:

   a. wireless links with adequate link-layer encryption and gatewayed
      to the public Internet, or

   b. a private IP network that is either very over-provisioned or has
      some means of congestion control.

   In the near future, the IESG may charter a working group to define an
   Internet standards-track protocol for efficient transmission of
   electronic mail messages, which will be highly compatible with
   existing Internet mail protocols, and which wil be suitable for
   operation over the global Internet, including both wireless and wired
   links.

In this case, too, the RFC Editor exercised the RFC Editor's independent 
judgment and published the document.

The Internet seems to have survived the publication, but I can't see any 
tangible benefit to the Internet from their publication either.

WRT formalities, Google found this reply to the posting of the note:

http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/current/msg08332.html

which seems to indicate that the IAB archives should show what happened 
afterwards; the mailing list also had a followup discussion that might 
be of interest.

This was eight years ago. The IESG that the complaint was made against was:

Alvestrand, Harald 	Applications
Bradner, Scott 	Transport
Burgan, Jeff 	Internet
Curran, John 	Operations & Management
Halpern, Joel 	Routing
Moore, Keith 	Applications
Narten, Thomas 	Internet
O'Dell, Michael 	Operations & Management
Reynolds, Joyce 	User Services
Romanow, Allyn 	Transport
Schiller, Jeff 	Security

What's the point of reposting this message now?

                                  Harald

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf