Phillip,
HBP> I take issue with the core versus the edge argument. I know it is IETF
HBP> theology but that does not make it true.
I'm not too interested in theology, either. Pragmatics are far more
useful.
HBP> It is empirically easier to deploy changes at servers than in mail clients.
No doubt you have empirical data to substantiate your empirical
assertion.
So, please cite some major enhancement to an Internet-scale,
Internet-diversity, existing service, that could have been done either
in an edge fashion or a core fashion, that went quickly (or at all)
through core deployment, rather than edge.
My own counter-example will be multi-media mail, which failed to deploy
through a core approach in spite of 2 or three eager efforts over a 10
year period, while MIME became useful within the first year of its
release.
HBP> The real deployment hurdle is any system that requires double ended
adoption
HBP> to provide value. Next to that problems are caused by systems that require
HBP> one party to bear the cost while the benefit will be felt by another.
"doubled ended" sounds like a dandy term. what does it mean?
if it means "at both ends" then i would be quite interested to hear how
any enhancement that involves interoperability can be useful if deployed
to only one component.
d/
--
Dave Crocker <mailto:dcrocker(_at_)brandenburg(_dot_)com>
Brandenburg InternetWorking <http://www.brandenburg.com>
Sunnyvale, CA USA <tel:+1.408.246.8253>, <fax:+1.866.358.5301>
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg