Re: Intent to revive "expires" header from draft-ietf-mailext-new-fields-15

Frank Ellermann wrote:
> Keith Moore wrote:
> 
>> we're better off without a standard Expires header than with one 
>> that would have the effect (intended or otherwise) of having such 
>> messages be deleted without recipients' consent.
> 
> IBTD.  No documented standard with strange variations in syntax in
> practice is worse than a clear standard with MUSTs and MUST NOTs.

then we disagree.  IMO, it's nearly always a disservice to the Internet 
community for us to define a standard way to do an undesirable thing.

(I say "nearly" because sometimes a feature is undesirable in general 
but there are corner cases when it is useful - though I don't think this 
is the case for "Expires" if that means that the message store or mail 
transport can delete the message without recipients' consent.)

Keith