Re: Webmail is implementation, not Internet architecture (was Re: Change the mailing list protocol, not DMARC.)

[Miles Fidelman <[e-mail]>]

Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote:
>
> On Sat, Jun 14, 2014 at 3:14 AM, Dave Crocker <[e-mail] 
> <mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
>
>     On 6/12/2014 6:33 PM, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote:
>     > On Thu, Jun 12, 2014 at 10:50 AM, John C Klensin
>     <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
>     ...
>     >     (2) One of those changes --support for remote body parts-- was
>     >     incorporated into MIME in its very first version and contains
>     >     most of the mechanism needed to support what I understand PHB is
>     >     recommending for PUSH-PULL-PULL.  It has been implemented in
>     >     several places but has gotten very little traction in the mail
>     >     sending and receiving community.  IMO, it ought to be incumbent
>     >     on anyone proposing a different "get notification, then retrieve
>     >     mail from server" model explain why their ideas will be more
>     >     successful than that 20-odd-year-old MIME mechanism.
>     >
>     > In a word - WebMail.
>
>     This is a classic confusion between software implementation and
>     operation, vesus networking architecture.
>
>     Webmail is nothing more than a particular style of user interface,
>     integrated into the operations of a particular service. 
>
>
> It is the mode used by the majority of mail users today. Which makes 
> it rather more than just technology from a deployment point of view.

That's almost certainly not true, or it's certainly highly questionable.

Two words:
1. Outlook
2. Smartphones


-- 
In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
In practice, there is.   .... Yogi Berra