Re: [ietf-smtp] Possible contribution to moving forward with RFC5321bis SMTP

[Keith Moore <[e-mail]>]

On 1/2/20 1:23 PM, Dave Crocker wrote:

> On 1/2/2020 10:17 AM, John C Klensin wrote:
>> That even includes such questions as
>> whether RFC 974 was the right solution to that problem and
>> remains the right solution in a world in which the DNS is being
>
> Where is there indication that this mechanism has been having 
> operational problems?
>
> Where is the discussion of an alternative?
>
> Failing to obtain some history covering both of these questions, 
> pursuing this topic doesn't seem likely to be productive, though it 
> could be wonderfully expensive in time and frustration.

Some of us remember these things and the references are potentially 
useful to those who do.    Are we constrained to only talk about what 
we're sure everyone already knows?   I certainly don't want us to have 
to revisit the entire history of email in this discussion (and to have 
to repeat that discussion every few years), but I assume that people 
seriously involved in email are motivated to do that anyway.   So I 
don't think it's wrong to refer to history, and I think that sometimes 
it provides valuable context.

I doubt that much, if any, historical discussion should be in the 
5321bis spec(s).   If someone really feels motivated there could be an 
informational document but I wouldn't want it to be a work item for a WG.

Keith