Re: [Asrg] MTA registration means Path registration

[Dave Crocker <dhc at dcrocker.net>]

Alan,

>> [ new, non-spammy email protocol ] would the current SMTP protocol
>> last a minute?  I don't think so.
AD>   I think it would also prove the lie of "any new system will take
AD> years to deploy".  It's all hypothetical, but I could see 10% of email
AD> traffic using a new system within weeks,

When a hypothesis is to be taken seriously, the basis for its predicted
success is offered. One basis is that is sounds wonderful and (the
theory goes) everyone will adopt it. The debate, then, is about both the
likelihood that the adoption process is possible and the likelihood that
it will apply in this case.

Another basis for a prediction is that the hypothesis has some
relationship to real-world experience, so that we know the adoption is
possible. The debate then is restricted to its likelihood of occurring
in this case.

It turns out we have quite a bit of experience with Internet adoption
sequences for changes to existing services. The experience is extremely
consistent.

You are predicting a future in which that consistent pattern is not
followed. For this you rely on assertions that are identical to the
assertions that have been made many times, about many proposals. They
never -- and I mean never -- have proved correct.

When you provide something empirical that provides a more behavioral
basis for the prediction, the credibility of that prediction is likely
to improve.


>>    Technically, no, there is not anything to distinguish different MTAs.

AD>   Technically?  They may all be running the same software on the
AD> identical machines, but I can look at the "Received:" lines, and
AD> discern which roles they play.  It's not hard.

It also is not direct or reliable.  This means that we cannot automate it.


AD>   Dave wants to call every MTA a "relay", no matter what it does.
AD> Since "MTA == relay", we have two synonymous terms, which means one is
AD> redundant.

And then there are gateways.


AD>   Dave doesn't want to create *new* names, based on new understanding.

Alan, it is time to stop with the ad hominem assertions.

In professional fora, it is entirely inappropriate to make assertions
about other people's desires, capabilities, and the like.

Better still is that your assertion is entirely incorrect.

d/

ps.  I used the term "ad hominem" as a flag to the chair.
--
 Dave Crocker <mailto:dcrocker at brandenburg.com>
 Brandenburg InternetWorking <http://www.brandenburg.com>
 Sunnyvale, CA  USA <tel:+1.408.246.8253>, <fax:+1.866.358.5301>


_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg