Bill Cole wrote:
I don't see how this reduces the effort required on the receiving side in
comparison to currently common practices.
Precisely - in fact, it increases the work the receiver has to do,
probably substantially.
Consider: the offer/callback approach is identical to SMTP up to the
DATA keyword.
The "offer" would have to have more-or-less the same information as the
pre-DATA SMTP information in normal SMTP. A SMTP server can just as
easily reject on that data pre-DATA, as to "choose not to do" the call
back. So, up to this point, the offer/callback approach doesn't do any
less work than normal SMTP.
Then offer/callback actually has to call back and retrieve the message.
You also have to build in mechanisms to make sure that someone _else_
isn't doing the retrieval.
Then, if you do any DATA filtering, _both_ approaches have to do similar
levels of work.
In other words, the offer/callback approach only causes you to expend
more work actually implementing the callback _itself_, plus checking it
for validity.
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)irtf(_dot_)org
http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg