RE: AD review comments on

[Graham Klyne <GK-lists@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

At 10:55 PM 9/26/02 -0700, ned.freed@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> > This suggests a possible approach of simply pulling all the problematic
> > MTA-to-UA stuff from the draft, and simply focusing on timely delivery (in
> > the original email sense).
>
> Doesn't that beg the question of how this mechanism differs from
> from the original DELIVERBY extension?

Indeed.

I think I know (roughly) the answer, but will respond differently.

I think such differences would rapidly surface from the above mooted 
approach.  TIMELY is consciously built on DELIVERBY, and uses existing 
DELIVERBY mechanisms to the maximum extent possible.  So, if after pulling 
the MTA-to-UA stuff there's nothing left, we simply say "use 
DELIVERBY".  Job done.

#g


-------------------
Graham Klyne
<GK@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>