Errors-to: owner-drums@CS.UTK.EDU
From: <manros@interramp.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Sep 95 13:40:10 PDT
Sender: Manros@interramp.com
Subject: Re: Another header-munging example 
To: IETF-DRUMS <drums@CS.UTK.EDU>
Cc: moore@CS.UTK.EDU
Message-ID: <Chameleon.4.01.1.950914135226.Manros@interramp.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

Friends,

Concerning this debate, I support Jacob's proposal to add further alternatives in the header.
I have difficulty to believe that people will actually change their implementations if we just try to 
re-interpret the behaviour, or favor one current behaviour over another, while keeping the same 
header parameter as before. Jacob's proposal gives a much cleaner new solution, while keeping 
the old parameter, with its ambiguities, for a migration period.

Carl-Uno

Carl-Uno Manros
Manros Consulting                             Tel: (617) 776-8300
125 Walnut Street                              Fax: (617) 776-0330
Somerville, MA                E-mail: manros@interramp.com

---------------Part of Original Message---------------
(from the floor :) )

> If existing 822 headers are interpreted in two different ways
> by much existing software, then there is an obvious risk that
> the outcome of the process you describe will be either:
> 
> (a) An ambiguous compromise to make everyone happy, but keeping
> the two different interpretations and the trouble which is caused
> by them.
> 
> (b) Recommending only one of the two, after which much existing
> software maybe will not follow the new standard because they do
> not like it.

Other outcomes are possible.  In particular, I believe it is possible
to *encourage* (rather than mandate) a narrower set of behaviors
for mailing lists which is more-or-less compatible with the installed 
base of user agents.  Present-day lists might not change their behavior,
but new lists might be more likely to adhere to the recommended behavior.
(some present-day lists might offer the recommended behavior as a 
per-recipient option.) Eventually we would gain uniformity than
we have now -- the rate being governed by how well the recommended
solution meets people's needs.

Keith

----------End of Original Message----------