Re: Last Call: SMTP Service Extension for Content Negotiation to Proposed Standard

On Wed, 03 Jul 2002 23:28:03 PDT, Dave Crocker said:

> And, by the way, it is inherent because a feature that is designed to 
> obtain per-recipient information is likely to be implemented in a way the 
> delivers per-recipient tailoring.

When all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail...

> The issue is not what the email originator does.  The issue is what the 
> sending MTA does.
> 
> In other words, how it maps the recipient list, generated by the 
> originator, into SMTP commands.

And there is currently disagreement whether to keep using nails, or if
bolts would be a better fastening device.  My point was that the original
"send to one recipient" mindset won't last very long, so whatever mapping
we end up using had better not be *too* horrendously inefficient. People
*will* end up sending to multiple recipients at a destination (unless we
insist that "destination" will be a "personal device" (like a PDA etc)
rather than a "mail server".
-- 
				Valdis Kletnieks
				Computer Systems Senior Engineer
				Virginia Tech

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Exmh version 2.5 07/13/2001

iD8DBQE9JHgicC3lWbTT17ARAq11AJ0f31JKJ8ar/bRGLiB6UJ7LKVcnIgCfTT4x
F/hRoy/QQ935jJL5nuuGzgo=
=kcU6
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----