Less coupling to the access protocol (e.g., POP, IMAP) is better IMO. 1
is better than 2.
Report submission methods should, to the extent practical, be
independent of the access protocol.
Regards,
Alex
-----Original Message-----
From: asrg-bounces(_at_)irtf(_dot_)org
[mailto:asrg-bounces(_at_)irtf(_dot_)org] On Behalf Of
Dave CROCKER
Sent: Saturday, February 06, 2010 2:17 PM
To: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF
Cc: Steve Atkins
Subject: Re: [Asrg] Consensus Call - submission via posting (was Re:
Iteration #3)
Just to be clear: the purpose of a consensus call is to resolve
ambiguity about
preferences among choices being discussed.
So I listed the choices that I had seen dominating the discussion,
rather than
listing among a full range of theoretical -- albeit possibly quite
reasonable --
choices.
If there is a consensus that /neither/ of the two listed choices is
preferred,
then a more careful listing and consideration of alternatives would make
sense.
d/
On 2/6/2010 12:42 PM, Steve Atkins wrote:
On Feb 6, 2010, at 10:37 AM, Dave CROCKER wrote:
On 2/6/2010 9:55 AM, Chris Lewis wrote:
Alessandro Vesely wrote:
If we reset the discussion why do we maintain that reports have to
be
sent by SMTP/MSA? IMAP is better (see below).
You just did it again. This _forces_ technology dependence,
My reading was that the group appeared to converge on using regular
posting for submitting a report.
But perhaps the presence of rough consensus needs to be determined
explicitly.
Would folks please respond to the list with their preference:
Reports should be submitted using a mechanisms that:
[1] Is the same as for submitting regular new mail, that is,
normal
posting. (Determination of the address to send to is a
separate
issue.)
[2] Is specific to the mechanism for retrieving the message for
which a
report is being submitted. (The details of such mechanisms
is a
separate issue.)
For completeness there's also
[3] Is the same for every mechanism for retrieving the message,
but not based on submitting email.
... for example, reporting via an HTTP post, or an SMTP extension,
or XMPP, or telepathy, regardless of whether the original message
was read via POP, IMAP, spool access, SMTP ETRN, SMS or an
XML-RPC call.
I think [1] is the right way to go, though.
Cheers,
Steve
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)irtf(_dot_)org
http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)irtf(_dot_)org
http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)irtf(_dot_)org
http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg