On Nov 3, 2016, at 11:48 AM, Bob Hinden <bob(_dot_)hinden(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com>
wrote:
While I agree that it has been broken for a long time and would be good to
fix, I note that understanding the problem does not mean there is a workable
solution. From reading this thread, it sounds to me that if there was a
workable solution, it would have been fixed by now. The potential solutions
being proposed, appear to have side effect worse than than the original
problem.
There are definitely workable solutions which appear to be attractive to a lot
of IETF participants. However, none of these solutions are perfect, and
therein lies the rub. There is no clean solution to this problem, and won’t
be until ARC is done. I want the clean solution too; I just think that in the
absence of that solution, the best tradeoff is not to continue with the current
brokenness. It is certainly true that breaking certain expectations in the
standard is bad; however, silent non-delivery of email and unsubscription of
participants from mailing lists is far worse.
We should either ensure that the non-delivery is explicit, so that people can
take action to correct the problem on their end, or else we should ensure that
delivery happens correctly, despite unfortunate breakage to rfc822 headers. I
too am happy the IESG is looking at this. :)