Ted Hardie wrote:
As both of you know and understand, the email system was built to be an
any-to-any mesh. That's not just a design goal.
In looking at the thread before and after your note, I'm struck by the focus
on technical issues, rather than human communication requirements. Internet
mail supports a wide array of human comm styles and needs. The technology is
useful for that breadth because it imposes as few limitations as possible.
When folks call for changes to the basic capabilities, they wave away segments
of human communications.
We should be careful of doing that, let we really render email marginal.
In any event, when folks talk about making changes -- to add features, fight
abuse, or whatever -- they should start with a non-technical discussion about
what changes for the human experience of email. And they should develop
consensus for that change.
Once they've got that, we'll probably be able to figure out how to engineer it.
Until the consensus is developed, these sorts of threads are repetitious
theoretical exercises, of no pragmatic benefit.
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf