SMTP MT test 40

[Bruce Schreiber]

Hi,

SMTP test 40 (Message with Bad Header) yields a fail when a SUT returns a valid Delivery Status Notification (DSN).  This is NOT a valid test.  The requirement is that when a valid x-header is present the SUT MUST return a DSN.  It is acceptable behavior for a SUT to ALWAYS return a DSN whehter or not it is requested.  In the case of my client they always return a DSN.  The bad header is ignored as required, but other acceptable behavior is causing the test to be scored as a failure.  

I submit that an exception should be granted here as the standard allows for unsolicited DSN messages to be returned.   The requirement is that when a valid x-header is present the DSN MUST be returned. The standard allows unsolicited DSNs to be returned.

Bruce 

[James Threatte]

This issue is holding up a certification. A prompt response would be appreciated. 

James

[Sandeep Savarala]

We would have to look into the specifications and get back to you. 

It seems like your client is doing a one-off behavior as these tests have been concrete for a very long time and are developed in accordance with the Direct reference implementation.

For test 40, even though the SUT sends the Dispatched MDN it SHOULD NOT contain X-DIRECT-FINAL-DESTINATION-DELIVERY header.

The Dispatched MDN being sent contains this header and hence the test fails.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Edge Test Tool (ETT)" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to edge-test-too...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/edge-test-tool/68089858-9db2-4ea1-9f1f-e94b1accd4c0n%40googlegroups.com.

[Sandeep Savarala]

[James Threatte]

Thank you very much Sandeep

[Bruce Schreiber]

Hi Sandeep,

Part of the normative definition of a Dispatched MDN (DSN) is the existence of the X-DIRECT-FINAL-DESTINATION-DELIVERY header.  If the SUT ALWAYS responds with a DSN it MUST have the header.  I again assert that SMTP test 40 is defective.  DirectTrust accreditation test for this and SMTP MT test 40 creates a conflict.

Bruce

[Bruce Schreiber]

How can I move this question along?

Bruce

[nagesh.bashyam (Dragon)]

Bruce

We will have to look into the specification w.r.t the unsolicited DSNs.

Do you have a reference already that you can point to ?

Thanks

Dragon

[Bruce Schreiber]

Hi Dragon,

I am attaching the Implemetnation Guide for Delivery Notification in Direct.  It is noticably silent as to unsolicited responses.  In discussion with Greg Meyer, the intent was to behave as thetest tool expects.  However there is no documentation on this.  I will recomment that DirectTrust review the document and discuss this issue.  In the meantime I would like an exception granted to SMTP test 40 for my client's SUT.

Thank you,

Bruce

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "Edge Test Tool (ETT)" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/edge-test-tool/pvi85QAlAaE/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to edge-test-too...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/edge-test-tool/bd7d67fc-a614-4e6b-9ed2-7c496e173c4an%40googlegroups.com.

--

Bruce B Schreiber

bbsch...@alum.mit.edu

[Nagesh Bashyam - Drajer]

Bruce 

My advice is to open up the discussion topic with Direct Trust and then discuss with the lab about the exception.

We just provide the tools, the ATL will be the one who will approve / disapprove the exception requested based on documentation provided.

If Direct Trust does clarify, please let us know and we can make the tool change based on the changes. 

Hope it helps.

Thanks

Dragon

<Implementation_Guide_for_Delivery_Notification_in_Direct_v1.0.pdf>

[Bruce Schreiber]

Does the ONC monitor this thread?  If so, may I appeal for an exception to this ambiguous use case?

Bruce