>
>
>
> John C Klensin wrote:
> > --On Sunday, 06 April, 2008 22:44 -0400 "Robert A. Rosenberg"
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> Remember that the A-Fallback behavior is ONLY due to the
> >> needs (back in the 1980s)
> ...
> > Someone would need to check with Craig Partridge, but I believe
> > that "only" (or "ONLY") in the above is not strictly correct.
> > It may have been the primary reason, but, no matter how often
> > "only" is repeated a desire to permit minimal configurations
> > did, I am quite sure, figure in to the equation.
>
>
> A side discussion about history might be interesting, but I'll suggest that i
> t
> should not really be a factor for the current discussion. The reasons are:
>
> 1. It has a substantial installed base of use now.
yes.
> 2. There is a benefit in the feature, by virtue of reducing the effort to cre
> ate
> and email receiving service, and in some environment the reduction is quite
> significant.
>
> 3. It is not generally recognized as causing any problems now.
It has unwanted consequences. With the drop of WKS email went
from "all machines that wanted email" to "all machines". All
this is trying to do is restore that distinction.
> What we need to do with this thread is end it.
>
> d/
> >
>
> --
>
> Dave Crocker
> Brandenburg InternetWorking
> bbiw.net
>
--
Mark Andrews, ISC
1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
