ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Last Call: draft-hutzler-spamops (Email Submission: Access and Accountability) to BCP

2007-06-21 10:41:34


--On Thursday, 21 June, 2007 18:16 +0100 Tony Finch
<dot(_at_)dotat(_dot_)at> wrote:

It's not inconsistent: you can't ignore the limits on what is
achievable. You seem to be suggesting that "current practice"
means what operators actually do (including the morons and
dinosaurs) and "best practice" means the fantasy ideal world
that we strive towards. Obviously a document describing the
former doesn't move us forwards, and one describing the latter
is useless for operators who are constrained by reality. I
think it's unreasonable to argue against the document on the
grounds that it tries to strike a reasonable middle path.

Hmm.  Since a few providers, at least one of them quite large,
have already imposed "find an MUA that supports authentication
or go elsewhere" requirements without being driven out of the
marketplace or even suffering any noticeable pain, I didn't
consider the requirement to be unachievable, unrealistic, or a
fantasy.  YMMD, of course.

     john


_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf