On Sat, 24 Jan 2004 02:16:34 EST, Hector Santos said: > May I ask, why do you assume I lack system design or system wide engineering > integration, design impact, understanding , capability or experience? I didn't. You're the one who brought up "closed mind attitude". You're also the one who asserted "You guys need to listen and begin opening your minds", without considering that maybe our minds *are* opened, and we're willing to listen to new ideas, but *no new ideas are forthcoming*. More about that later. You're also making the rash assumption that my reply was directed entirely to you personally, and not to the lurkers on the list, or to the people who may read the list archives in the future, trying to figure out why *their* brilliant pet proposal got shot down... > 1) the flawed assumption a proposed consideration, concept or idea is not a > good idea to begin with at any level minimizing possibility or consideration > for implementation, and OK, You tell me. What do *you* tell one of your engineers when they come in with the *same* idea that 8 other engineers have suggested, and this latest one hasn't done anything about the fatal flaw you already pointed out to 8 others? > All I am saying it is a mistake I lack reason, knowledge or insight in my > statements. I appreciate the experience and historical IETF perspectives > shared by your and other IETF veterans here . But I will not allow views I Exactly. Unfortunately, some of the "historical perspectives" the veterans have are: 0) Most of the following is oriented towards anti-spam stuff, mostly because that's the single biggest unsolved problem in the SMTP world. 1) Most "new ideas" are re-inventions of ideas already proposed anywhere from months to decades before. 2) Most of said ideas have a fatal flaw. If they didn't, we'd probably have deployed them the *first* time they were suggested. 3) There's been a *lot* of ideas with fatal flaws. See Vernon Schryver's intro to the subject: http://www.rhyolite.com/anti-spam/you-might-be.html And keep in mind that list is not exhaustive - it's merely the anti-spam ideas Vernon has seen *so* many times he got annoyed. 4) There's still spam. Why? Because none of *us* are clever enough to come up with an idea that doesn't get nailed by at least one point on Vernon's list either. As a result, the most productive use of our time is to point everybody at that list or some similar, and have them self-evaluate their proposal, and let us know if they think they're really on to something new. 5) Never try to read too much into the postings of anybody who posts at 3:30AM who isn't actually employed as third-shift personnel. :)
Attachment:
pgp00074.pgp
Description: PGP signature