Re: [ietf-smtp] Good to see new list, comments about the "purpose"

[Hector Santos <[e-mail]>]

On 7/29/2020 12:19 PM, Dave Crocker wrote:
> On 7/29/2020 9:08 AM, Michael Peddemors wrote:
>> I believe this is an opportunity, and the BOF should consider that
>> the working group's mandate be extended larger than originally
>> suggested.
>>
>> As pointed out previously on other threads, having a working group
>> that covers the whole email core, would enable this working group to
>> tackle more wide ranging email problems, that are important to the
>> internet community.
>
>
> That would be an excellent way to avoid getting the primary task done,
> which is to get the two, primary specification elevated to full
> standard.  It's a variation on attempting to boil the ocean.
>
> It's not that the larger scope isn't worthy, it's that it isn't
> practical.
>
> After the primary task is completed, it might make sense to consider
> rechartering, for a scope of the type you suggest.  But not before then.
>

Dave,  I agree with you, keep the eye on the prize, RFC5322/5321 
standardization. Very important.  I'm sure there will be plenty of 
"Heads Up" discussions, items that can perhaps be phrased as 
implementation notes.


-- 
Hector Santos,
https://secure.santronics.com
https://twitter.com/hectorsantos