[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: We need an IETF BCP for GREY LISTING
Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
On Sun, Oct 16, 2011 at 01:42:18PM -0400, Hector wrote:
Here is the thing, IMO, the prize at the end of the day is:
Fastest, less waste in Delivery and High Throughput
For many, an email today has "No Value" tomorrow, especially in the
business world. I'm sure that is the normal expectation for most
systems and people expecting timely emails.
Richard Kulawiec stated:
The problem here, I think, isn't the technology: it's unrealistic and/or
misplaced expectations. If I might quote my own haiku on this subject:
Mail is not the web
Mail is not for file transfer
Mail is not I M
It's certainly true that a subset of people expect mail to be very
fast; it might even be true that this subset is large enough that
it's "normal". But I don't think that necessarily means we should
engineer to meet that expectation, just as I don't think the propensity
of some people to attempt transfer of 100M files via email means that
we should engineer to make that feasible.
I agree. What's more, I think the "no value" premise seems to
contradict the massive efforts undertaken by some very large companies
to maintain user trust in email. I have to think given the weight behind
those efforts that it's not so easily dismissed as a fool's errand.
Who said anything dismissing efforts? For many, the longer email is
delayed, the less value it has. That "premise" is not contradictive of
anything or any efforts to improve the timely/acceptance delivery
problem. There are many representations here - the issues apply to
everyone who is the business of supplying SMTP software or who operate
mail systems of any size. Lets not create a chasm once again.
Maybe a shorter way to put that last paragraph is that if we agree that
reasonably timely delivery of mail is a Good Thing, then I think we have
many other problems to tackle before we turn our attention to
Agree here too.
It timely delivery is still important. But the reality is GL is
contributing to that problem. GL is something that we can grasp and
so far, almost everyone here agrees a IETF document should help in
some manner, if only to document the BCP.
I don't think you are grasping that for many GL rejections is going
beyond the first attempt.