[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-crocker-email-arch-06.txt]

2007-03-08 19:10:52


- I still can't get a natural grasp of your terminologies, but this is

- This was mentioned the last time I commented on your paper,
  SIEVE, although comes with a RFC, it is not the standard
  "mail filtering agent" everyone uses. The suggestion was to make
  the concept generic, like everything else in your
  (crowded) diagram. SIEVE is not generic. It is a UNIQUE, CRYPTIC
  language. I suggested MFA for Mail Filtering Agent and use
  SIEVE parenthetically.

Just consider when someone looks at your diagram or doc, if they can say, "ah yes, except for sieve, and odd terms, we match and fit that model" then its all good.


Dave Crocker wrote:



As most of you know, I've been working for a couple of years on a document
that attempts to specify the *current* Internet mail service.

The effort has been motivated by realizing that there is a very poor shared
community view about the details of this service, in terms of concepts and
architecture. Along the way, I have had quite a bit of encouragement from
folks out in the scruffy field.

It is taking so long to document email, because it turns out to be
considerably more complex that I had realized and finding ways to describe it
required vastly more thought than I anticipated.  (I don't know how anyone
else reacts to my saying that, but it scares me silly.)

Each major revision to the document has produced feedback that has required
substantial changes to the architecture and the document. However, I believe
it has finally reached an asymptote.

I'm feeling that the document needs to get published, and so I would like to
encourage folk to think in terms of what changes they feel are absolutely

My intent is to make one more revision to the document, based on a current
round of feedback, and then submit the document as an IETF Proposed Standard. During the public review in that process (Last Call) I will be asking folk to
send notes of support, stating why they want it published.

     So, my reuqest is that you think in terms of what is
     missing, wrong or otherwise would prevent you from
     being in favor of having this published as a Proposed

The html version is at




ps. A number of people believe the document is too long.  That said, no one
has offered specific suggestions for what to cut. Not surprisingly, the text
is becoming a blur to me.  So I would appreciate input along these lines.

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: I-D ACTION:draft-crocker-email-arch-06.txt
Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2007 15:50:04 -0500

A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts

    Title        : Internet Mail Architecture
    Author(s)    : D. Crocker
    Filename    : draft-crocker-email-arch-06.txt
    Pages        : 42
    Date        : 2007-3-8
A URL for this Internet-Draft is: