[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ietf-smtp] [Shutup] Proposed Charter for the "SMTP Headers Unhealthy To User Privacy" WG (fwd)

2015-12-01 06:27:17
Ted Lemon answers Dave Crocker:
IMO an essential design benefit in many/most aspects of Internet
technologies is avoiding making any more global assumptions (or
requirements) than essential.  "Deferring to the end systems" is a very
broad-based design requirement and it includes minimizing assumptions
about the transit infrastructure.

Sure, but in this case wouldn't deferring to the end systems argue in favor of allowing end systems to make the decision as to whether their private information should be exposed?

As I see it, that's not the question here. The question is: Should there be an RFC that can be used/misused to apply pressure regarding trace fields etc?

The issue isn't whether person X chooses to add trace fields. The issue is whether person Y can shout at Z to not add or even mangle trace fields, with support from a document that looks official, substantial and authoritative, even though neither Y nor Z understand the nuances of RFC statuses.


ietf-smtp mailing list

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