RE: Some existing proposals for next-generation email

I think we should have a pretty good reason before re-inventing something
that already exists.

We all know about the problems with email, the problems with RSS is
something that I have heard much less about.

Also we need to decide how much of email to reinvent. Just SMTP or POP3 and
IMAP as well?

		Phill

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Paul Hoffman / IMC [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2004 6:29 PM
> To: Paul Crowley; [email protected]
> Subject: Re: Some existing proposals for next-generation email
> 
> 
> 
> At 11:16 PM +0000 1/29/04, Paul Crowley wrote:
> >RSS is interesting here but as it stands it's only suitable for
> >applications where missing an item is not disastrous, or where the
> >total number of items ever published is few. ...
> >
> >IMAP and NNTP do not suffer from this problem, because the client can
> >maintain state on what it's already seen and relay this state to the
> >server.
> 
> So, let me say it again: this list is about determining the needs in 
> new protocols, not fixing current ones.
> 
> To re-cast what is said above in terms appropriate for this list: 
> "the receiving user agents in the next-generation protocol should not 
> lose messages just because the user hasn't checked in a while".
> 
> --Paul Hoffman, Director
> --Internet Mail Consortium
>