[Top] [All Lists]

Re: SMTP traffic control

2011-10-29 02:55:18
On 2011-10-28 23:09:26 -0700, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-ietf-smtp(_at_)mail(_dot_)imc(_dot_)org 
[mailto:owner-ietf-smtp(_at_)mail(_dot_)imc(_dot_)org] On Behalf Of Peter 
J. Holzer
Sent: Friday, October 28, 2011 12:10 PM
To: ietf-smtp(_at_)imc(_dot_)org
Subject: Re: SMTP traffic control

I really don't understand the resistance against the idea. Some servers
and some clients will implement it and benefit from it (if they are
talking to each other), others won't and for them everything will be as
before. How would a standardized way of conveying the same information
that some servers already convey informally hurt the mail system?

The issue is not one of potential harm, it's a measure of the cost of
specifying this through the IETF (which is high)

How high is the cost of of publishing an experimental RFC? Somebody has
to write it, a few people have to discuss it on a mailing list, and
finally an editor has to do a bit of QA and publish it. What do I miss?


   _  | Peter J. Holzer    | Web 2.0 könnte man also auch übersetzen als
|_|_) | Sysadmin WSR       | "Netz der kleinen Geister".
| |   | hjp(_at_)hjp(_dot_)at         | 
__/   | |  -- Oliver Cromm in desd

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

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