smart@mel.dit.csiro.au (Robert Smart) (07/25/90)
In article <159@tots.UUCP> tep@tots.Logicon.COM (Tom Perrine) writes: > >Perhaps we need to take this discussion to one of the above >newsgroups, or start a new mailing list, perhaps mail-modernization or >somesuch? > Comp.mail seems to be unused. It would be nice if people working on the problem would let us hoi polloi know where we are headed. This is such a complicated and multi-faceted problem that it can only be solved correctly on the basis of wide public discussion. Three or ten or even thirty experts in a back room are not going to understand all the ramifications. I would like to see wide discussion before we get to draft RFCs. I apologise for being sexist. Come on gals as well. I apologise for suggesting that X.400 designers are not sensible. I meant that they weeren't sensible to the need for backward compatibility with existing Internet mail systems. Even this is not true. Jacob Palme is the only one that posts descriptions of X.400 meetings to the network and those postings show a lot of common sense and good will. I apologise for posting to the wrong newsgroup. Followups are directed to comp.mail. Mail is important to the general workings of a TCP/IP network and I am concerned that the people who care about the TCP/IP suite have written SMTP/RFC822 off prematurely. I think that enhancing SMTP will improve interoperability with X.400 mail and simultaneously provide a backstop in case X.400 is not as successful as many obviously expect. I apologise for ignoring RFC1049 which is a relevant attempt to move things in the right direction. Bob Smart <smart@mel.dit.csiro.au> or <uunet!munnari!ditmela.oz!smart>