Re: user-visible goals

Markus Stumpf wrote:

>>Isn't one person's "extension" another person's "patch"?  If not,
>>what is the distinction?  Is ESMTP an "extension" or a "patch" to
>>SMTP?
> 
> 
> Neither is a topic for this list. This list isn't about fixing (E)SMTP
> it is about something completely new. Hence the name  Next Generation.
> There are a lot of modifications to SMTP available as drafts from the
> IETF I-D repository.

A brief recap: Victor Engmark decried "patches" but said that a
next-generation system should have "flexibility" via "extensions".

Do you disagree regarding "flexibility" and "extensions"?

If not, can you provide a useful, objective set of definitions to
distinguish a "patch" from an "extension".

ESMTP/SMTP was an example; don't get bent out of shape over it.