Re: Last Call: SMTP Service Extension for Content Negotiation to Propose

On Wed, 03 Jul 2002 23:28:03 PDT, Dave Crocker said:

> And, by the way, it is inherent because a feature that is designed to 
> obtain per-recipient information is likely to be implemented in a way the 
> delivers per-recipient tailoring.
When all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail...

> The issue is not what the email originator does.  The issue is what the 
> sending MTA does.
>
> In other words, how it maps the recipient list, generated by the 
> originator, into SMTP commands.
And there is currently disagreement whether to keep using nails, or if
bolts would be a better fastening device.  My point was that the original
"send to one recipient" mindset won't last very long, so whatever mapping
we end up using had better not be *too* horrendously inefficient. People
*will* end up sending to multiple recipients at a destination (unless we
insist that "destination" will be a "personal device" (like a PDA etc)
rather than a "mail server".
-- 
                                Valdis Kletnieks
                                Computer Systems Senior Engineer
                                Virginia Tech

pgp9Eiuhmz3pw.pgp
Description: PGP signature