RE: AD review comments on

> At 10:55 PM 9/26/02 -0700, [email protected] wrote:
> >>This suggests a possible approach of simply pulling all the problematic
> >>MTA-to-UA stuff from the draft, and simply focusing on timely delivery (in
> >>the original email sense).
> >
> >Doesn't that beg the question of how this mechanism differs from
> >from the original DELIVERBY extension?

> Indeed.

> I think I know (roughly) the answer, but will respond differently.

> I think such differences would rapidly surface from the above mooted
> approach.  TIMELY is consciously built on DELIVERBY, and uses existing
> DELIVERBY mechanisms to the maximum extent possible.  So, if after pulling
> the MTA-to-UA stuff there's nothing left, we simply say "use
> DELIVERBY".  Job done.

As long as the WG is happy with this approach I have no problem with it.

				Ned