[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-crocker-email-arch-05.txt]

2006-10-24 07:30:24

Valdis(_dot_)Kletnieks(_at_)vt(_dot_)edu wrote:
On Mon, 23 Oct 2006 22:54:05 EDT, Dave Crocker said:

New version.  Mostly cleanup.  Adopted ADministrative Management Domain (ADMD)
as the latest term for what a Boundary MTA sits at the edge of.

Thanks for inducing a X.400 flashback.

Might want to find another term unless the X.400 ADMD is *really* congruent
to what you wanted - and unless it's *identical*, include text explaining
how it's different from an X.400 ADMD.  Otherwise, the silverback gorillas
among us are likely to get confused....

As you have probably noticed, I've been thrashing around, looking for a term. I think this is the third or fourth try.

I came to ADMD because I've noticed a pretty strong tendency for people to refer to these administrative environments as "domains". Given the collision with "domain name" I think it important to have the administrative term be significantly distinctive, even if the momentum of current use requires that it contain the word "domain".

As for "identical", I believe the X.400 ADMD/PRMD constructs -- or at least their basis -- are, in fact, essentially identical to the boundary (tussle) model I'm looking for, with the architecture doc. However Internet mail does not *require* the mediation that is implied by the X.400 private-vs-public relationship. It's an operational choice, of course, since some folks do go through service providers. But it is not an architectural imperative. Hence, I would claim, any environment that processes mail is an (independent) ADMD and we do not need the PRMD construct.

As for silver gorillas, I'm frankly assuming that the world of X.400 experience is sufficiently marginalized in the world of the modern Internet to make that concern minor.


  Dave Crocker
  Brandenburg InternetWorking

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