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

In <[email protected]> Keith Moore <[email protected]> writes:

>But the idea of a message store wasn't part of the original internet 
>mail architecture. So it's not clear to everyone where its 
>responsibilities lie.  If the message store is (as I believe) a part of 
>the recipient's user agent then it should be neutral with respect to 
>storing messages except when given explicit instructions by the recipient.

Yes, but that all changed when the IETF agreed to standardize POP3 and
IMAP, which are clearly "message stores", even though it is clear that
they are acting solely on behalf of the recipient who, theoretically, has
absolute contol over them (in practice, the recipient has to put up with
whatever his ISP deigns to provide :-( ).

But we still have to decide whether, in the course of introducing this
header, we want to specify any additional behaviour (or absence thereof)
for the POP3 and IMAP documents.

-- 
Charles H. Lindsey ---------At Home, doing my own thing------------------------
Tel: +44 161 436 6131 Fax: +44 161 436 6133   Web: http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~chl
Email: [email protected]      Snail: 5 Clerewood Ave, CHEADLE, SK8 3JU, U.K.
PGP: 2C15F1A9      Fingerprint: 73 6D C2 51 93 A0 01 E7 65 E8 64 7E 14 A4 AB A5