On Mon, Jul 21, 2025, at 03:48, Dave Crocker wrote: > Bron, et al, > > On 7/20/2025 12:26 AM, Bron Gondwana wrote: >> On Sun, Jul 20, 2025, at 00:58, Dave Crocker wrote: >>> On 6/18/2025 2:15 PM, Bron Gondwana wrote: >>>> But also, did a lot of thinking about how to support multiple RCPT-TO in a >>>> single SMTP transaction. >>> Simple question: Why? >>> >> Simple answer - I spoke to someone from Microsoft about their Enterprise >> architecture and the kind of mail usage patterns they see. > So, extensive and convergent conversation in the decision-making forum for a > working group is overridden by an undocumented, private conversation one > person had with some other folk who are easily able to show up in the forum, > but haven't. > > Good to see that the working group process is functioning well. >
I proposed a change to a document on which I'm an author, which at that point was not an adopted working group document. That seems a totally reasonable thing to do, and when queried about WHY I proposed those changes, I gave my reasoning - based on information gathering which I have been doing in an attempt to understand how email is used by people not at IETF. Sure they could come to IETF. Maybe they will. If IETF wants to produce documents that will be adopted by the rest of the world, we can't actually just say "show up or we will deliberately ignore your needs". > Undocumented and frankly rather vague, second-hand reports are not usually > enough to alter working group rough consensus. > I did not believe that we had reached a consensus on this topic. If you can point to a consensus call that I missed, that would be appreciated. > Your being persuaded is nice. What I don't understand is why it is > sufficient and why the working group did not pursue further discussions of > the trade-offs. Note that I cited additional costs, for example. Are those > to be ignored? > This is a draft, not a published document. We can; and maybe would be discussing the merits of the trade-offs here - if the discussion hadn't been sidetracked by meta issues. Just updating a pre-adoption draft to describe a different approach is not IT MUST BE THIS AND ONLY THIS, and I'm surprised that you're treating it as such and reacting so strongly to it. Let's discuss the merits of the different approaches. Regards, Bron. -- Bron Gondwana, CEO, Fastmail Pty Ltd / Fastmail US LLC [email protected]
_______________________________________________ Ietf-dkim mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
