Re: [ietf-smtp] lounging around

"John Levine" <johnl@taugh.com> Fri, 03 January 2020 16:51 UTC

Return-Path: <johnl@iecc.com>
X-Original-To: ietf-smtp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf-smtp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 34E2D120091 for <ietf-smtp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 3 Jan 2020 08:51:54 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.75
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.75 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.25, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1536-bit key) header.d=iecc.com header.b=kvVZFTfM; dkim=pass (1536-bit key) header.d=taugh.com header.b=X8NJAYo1
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id L3Ej4ZkXHass for <ietf-smtp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 3 Jan 2020 08:51:53 -0800 (PST)
Received: from gal.iecc.com (gal.iecc.com [IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126:0:43:6f73:7461]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A6CAC12008F for <ietf-smtp@ietf.org>; Fri, 3 Jan 2020 08:51:52 -0800 (PST)
Received: (qmail 48745 invoked from network); 3 Jan 2020 16:51:51 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=iecc.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=be67.5e0f7127.k2001; i=printer-iecc.com@submit.iecc.com; bh=RCKAd4FLP3jluutcXLzA+K4fcprruWHFK/ApiT0vrfQ=; b=kvVZFTfMwm5uvCWWBeuQ/9JX7VjAfAKi6AradF/XVVKZ+crJyOs3m92exFUmkGsbzCC7TTrZBjiwrRB6kdPPWTH+58WvaJ0IdkzAKk6GgHV0J3LraHbVc++tdg9KL8d2ycOxvjjzEgkoUOOJtqIM80sdeQcbxTGbuibrPPgxZfegtwlwFxUpukcstuyHmKB4A4KkuzuyWrM2sdlMu26IPsfEedLiK2cff+sf1PuAjLmA1mY8v4SMLTVxUBiHZjfs
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=taugh.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=be67.5e0f7127.k2001; olt=printer-iecc.com@submit.iecc.com; bh=RCKAd4FLP3jluutcXLzA+K4fcprruWHFK/ApiT0vrfQ=; b=X8NJAYo1+rj68XS3O75zsyX7VrLUnn1WxS7pZ1Fda7LkPzJSul5uOq1UYYgvnT2Zw1kk3HdRiAeTik4I3bgM4U1v5fAyBxXkAfbbI5nBQR6iR0f1foZTEVLPqHlouHxIID/E/TWHy1i/jos9w9PYBQi1dosJb8fDzx71aljJ8k6Itk/pQVpf+Om9x145LWLkSzWeJt+aj6RDpzKgF1gyHMZFjGrkgTKzhNQ+pxJT7m78/tnHCcnwPJkQJkABaN5I
Received: from ary.qy ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) by imap.iecc.com ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) with ESMTPSA (TLS1.2 ECDHE-RSA AES-256-GCM AEAD, printer@iecc.com) via TCP6; 03 Jan 2020 16:51:51 -0000
Received: by ary.qy (Postfix, from userid 501) id B024F11EFF68; Fri, 3 Jan 2020 11:51:50 -0500 (EST)
Date: Fri, 03 Jan 2020 11:51:50 -0500
Message-Id: <20200103165150.B024F11EFF68@ary.qy>
From: John Levine <johnl@taugh.com>
To: ietf-smtp@ietf.org
Cc: dcrocker@bbiw.net
In-Reply-To: <b6bba813-3764-7ac9-9502-7794058ccedd@dcrocker.net>
Organization: Taughannock Networks
X-Headerized: yes
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf-smtp/-_8lXzf97aYor3pmxpJOrCTqnMM>
Subject: Re: [ietf-smtp] lounging around
X-BeenThere: ietf-smtp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Discussion of issues related to Simple Mail Transfer Protocol \(SMTP\) \[RFC 821, RFC 2821, RFC 5321\]" <ietf-smtp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf-smtp>, <mailto:ietf-smtp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf-smtp/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf-smtp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-smtp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-smtp>, <mailto:ietf-smtp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 03 Jan 2020 16:51:54 -0000

In article <b6bba813-3764-7ac9-9502-7794058ccedd@dcrocker.net> you write:
>The mobile lounge was an impressively good example of a very good idea 
>what totally didn't work as intended.

I'd flip it around -- the mobile lounges worked (still work) exactly
as intended, but the world changed underneath them.  When Dulles was
designed in the 1950s, air travel was mostly point to point, so the
passengers, dressed in natty suits and dresses, would take a leisurely
drive to the airport for their long flight and the trip on the mobile
lounge was a small part of the overall process.  Even so Dulles was
largely unused until long distance planes got too big for National and
in 1966 they limited National mostly to short-haul flights.

The mobile lounges really stopped being usable after deregulation when
there were a lot more flights and airlines went to hub-and-spoke
arrangements with most passengers making connections.  A connection
requiring two mobile lounge trips would be pretty painful.  The other
airport that depended on mobile lounges was Montreal Mirabel which
also had other problems, notably being an hour and a half from the
city without the promised high speed rail link.

Rather ironically, in Europe it remains common for planes, even large
long distance ones, to park at remote stands at the airport.  This is
exactly the situation mobile lounges were intended for, but instead,
you take a conventional bus and then run through the rain across the
tarmac and up the stairs to the plane.

There must be a moral for SMTP in here somewhere.

R's,
John