On Thu, Apr 16, 2015 at 11:34 AM, John R Levine <jo...@taugh.com> wrote:
> At least, we need to look at what non-technical costs they push onto other > parties. > > Some changes have insignificant non-techincal costs and are not > controversial, e.g., adding a List-ID header for the benefit of recipients > who know how to use it. Changes that seem similar may have quite different > costs, e.g., adding a List-ID and removing subject tags, forcing recipients > to change the way they sort and organize their incoming messages. > Rolf kind of said what I'm thinking here: I agree that we need to look at the costs. But are we willing, or not willing, to accept costs that are not zero? For example, asserting that all parties should have to take on zero non-technical cost here seems like it might leave us dead in the water before we even start. I don't have a good non-zero suggestion though, because it's hard (or maybe even impossible) to be specific. -MSK
_______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list dmarc@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
