Re: Re: Getting 2822 to Draft

[Dave Crocker <dhc@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Folks

>  2822 allows X-* fields and always has. Any future document will 
>  allow them. What 2822 doesn't do is give special meaning to them 
>  other than as optional-fields. -- Pete Resnick 
>  <http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick/>
>  QUALCOMM Incorporated - Direct phone: (858)651-4478, Fax: (858)651-
>  1102


1. If X- fields are the only technical aspect of 2822 that folks have 
any comments about, then the doc is clearly is really excellent shape.

2. In spite of originally thinking that X- fields were a really 
excellent idea, I am now a vigorous opponent to the use of X- fields. 
However I think that any significant effort to focus on their use is a 
waste of time, at best, and more likely will just confuse things.  The 
labels exist.  They are part of the usage model.  The damage they cause 
might be real but it would be difficult to say that it has really caused 
major damage to the Internet.  Adding a discussion paragraph to 2822 is 
as much as might be useful.

d/
--
Dave Crocker <dcrocker-at-brandenburg-dot-com>
Brandenburg InternetWorking <http://brandenburg.com>