--On 4 February 2010 04:39:58 +0000 John Levine <johnl(_at_)taugh(_dot_)com>
wrote:
Would it really be such a sin to just pretend that POP3 doesn't
exist/matter? It is a pretty primitive mechanism, after all. Not
everything needs to be a 100% solution to be useful.
Well, heck, we could just tell everyone to switch to web mail and we'd
already be done.
There are a whole lot of people picking up their mail using POP from a
whole lot of mail systems. Disks are cheap but they are not free, and
many ISPs do not want to host the permanent mailstore for their users.
I agree we don't need a 100% solution, but we really need at least a
50% solution.
It's simple to come up with a 100% solution for IMAP users, based on
current mechanisms (flags, ANNOTATE or METADATA).
There may be a 100% solution for POP3 users, but I think it's not going to
be as good as an IMAP solution, and won't be as simple to define the
standard, or to implement it.
So, let's not ignore POP3 users. After all, their data will be useful in
identifying spammers, and there are a lot of them. But, equally, let's not
try to solve two different problems with the same solution. And, let's not
delay an IMAP solution while examining the POP3 problem.
R's,
John
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)irtf(_dot_)org
http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg
--
Ian Eiloart
IT Services, University of Sussex
01273-873148 x3148
For new support requests, see http://www.sussex.ac.uk/its/help/
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)irtf(_dot_)org
http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg