Re: [ietf-smtp] [Shutup] Proposed Charter for the "SMTP Headers Unhealth

On 12/2/2015 12:24 PM, Dave Crocker wrote:
> > It seems to me that #1 is covered by virtue of the request existing in
> > the first place.
> Please re-read what I wrote a bit more carefully and consider the part I
> said is mostly ignored, namely the second half of #1.  If you still hold
> the view you stated, please explain how the second half has been satisfied.
"Is there clear indication that 'the community' wants to do this". OK,
how do we determine that?
"by virtue of there being folk who want spend time on wg development"? 
It seems to be case that such people exist, or we wouldn't be having
this discussion. "(and) they or other folk making noises about interest
in implementing and developing it" It seems like this whole discussion
is that of "them and other folks" making noises about implementing and
developing it.
> If there is no obvious problem with doing work in this space, then
> yeah waiting until it's done to look for specific problems makes
> sense. But that's not applicable for the current type of work, as
> dangers of the /category/ of work have already been cited. d/ 
As the proponents of the WG have noted, the "big four" webmail providers
are already to some extent doing things similar to what the
WG-proponents are considering, and the Internet hasn't collapsed in pain
from their so doing. It seems, then, that any problems are, in fact,
non-obvious, as the ones which have been raised have been shown to be
(to some extent) overblown.



-- 
I prefer to use encrypted mail. My public key fingerprint is
FD6A 6990 F035 DE9E 3713 B4F1 661B 3AD6 D82A BBD0.

You can download it at http://www.megacity.org/gpg_dballing.txt

Learn how to encrypt your email with the E-Mail Self Defense
Guide: https://emailselfdefense.fsf.org/en/

signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

_______________________________________________
ietf-smtp mailing list
ietf-smtp(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-smtp