[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Intent to revive "expires" header from draft-ietf-mailext-new-fields-15

2008-07-29 13:26:54

Michael Welzl wrote:

I don't understand that. I have seen wide agreement that we
don't want to specify behavior #1, so why do you call this
more realistic?

Because the practice of automatic purging already exist without any flags, and clearly without user permission. That is reality.

This proposal attempts to introduce a new header that would require a change and alteration ($$$) of this existing design and practice.

IMO, this is asking much more than what is realistically more possible, which is to simply state:

   Servers which employ automatic purging of old messages
   MAY let this field influence the purging process.

Once there is a criteria of user permission, I think you can run into an ugly game of users having a false illusion of controls they never had in the first place.


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>