Re: [apps-discuss] Comments on draft-ietf-appsawg-received-state

[Dave Crocker <[e-mail]>]

On 6/8/2012 4:19 AM, Ned Freed wrote:
> The problem here is that it's possible to think about MTA states in a lot of
> different ways, some of which don't map well if at all onto actual
> implementations. While the risk is low, I think expert review is needed to make
> sure things stay sane.

Ned,

You are of course right that one can get the choice(s) very wrong. And 
I've no trouble believe that some form of getting it wrong could have a 
toxic effect.  My question is what the actual damage of that is likely 
to be in the real world, /over time/.

That is, not just what is the likelihood that a site will use one of 
these potentially damaging values, but what is the likelihood that it 
will persist?

The world of MTA software developers is small enough to prompt me to 
believe that even if one of them gets this seriously wrong, a) it will 
get corrected quickly through natural forces, or b) they will have a 
plethora of other serious problems with their software and worrying 
about this one isn't worth the effort.

In contrast, Expert Review imposes quite an expensive /ongoing/ load on 
/us/, for every registration, nevermind on the folk who want to do the 
registering.

I see that as a very poor value proposition, especially in terms of 
community resources.  Which is why I favor FCFS.

d/
-- 
  Dave Crocker
  Brandenburg InternetWorking
  bbiw.net