On 11/25/2019 8:40 PM, Bron Gondwana wrote:
*0. Are there known deficiencies with the current documents which could
be addressed by revising them.*
If the answer to that is NO then obviously the others don't matter.
Hmmm. What I advised was intentionally more elaborate than your terse
summary and that's because the really important process is in the effort
to answer the simple question you offer. That's why I think it is
important to focus on the substance that permits being able to answer it
compellingly.
There is a common view that the important work of an organization like
the IETF is producing standards, but really those documents are just
side-effects. Those documents fail when the real work isn't done,
namely developing meaningful community participation that establishes
that it wants the documents and can (and will) use them.
The substance of figuring out what work on email specs needs to be done
is developing a community assessment that has more than a tiny number of
well-intentioned folk, and that actually represents desire of the larger
email community.
The fact that there is -- and, unfortunately, always has been -- so much
ad hoc deviation from the email specs suggests an ongoing failure to
develop and use that community adequately. There's no comfort in the
fact that this is not just a problem for email specs, given how much
proprietary ad hocery there is elsewhere in the stack.
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
_______________________________________________
ietf-smtp mailing list
ietf-smtp(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-smtp