I was referring to widely practiced Standard Email Compliance Policies
that include archiving, expiration, mining, etc following and/or meeting
required data retention regulations outside the considerations of user
Nothing insane, irresponsible or illegal about them. While you may not
feel is our job to bless the practice, I'm sure others will take all
these related issues into account. You made it quite clear your view
point; backends MUST not deal with this header and if they do only with
user permission. Well, the devil is in the details; e.g., if user
permission is provided (assuming it is even offered at all), it can not
defeat what may be already in place. It can only serve to accelerate
the expired classification. Not extend it - unless of course an
implementation wishes to consider that logic.
Keith Moore wrote:
Hector Santos wrote:
As you know Ned, expiration that is out of the control of the MUA
(user) is already in practice.
That's irrelevant for a discussion of a standard. There are lots of
things that are "already in practice" that are irresponsible or
Our job is NOT to bless those practices, it is to define practices
that are sane.
We can't stop people from implementing things that are irresponsible
or insane. But there are things that we can do. We can make it
clear that such behavior is a violation of the standard. And in some
cases we can design protocols in such a way that such violations are
observable, so that the responsible parties can be held accountable by
whatever means is available (legal or economic or social).