[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [stdaddr] Re: Last Call: Standard Electronic Mail AddressesFor ...
At 10:05 PM -0700 8/3/96, Paul A Vixie wrote:
>misunderstanding.'' The whole idea is to make sure that something the
>sender does will work. Right now, for many domains and/or organizations,
Can't be done.
The ability of human writers to invent strings that were not
expected by "liberal" software far exceeds anything you (or I) would wish
to try to counter. That is why the standard should seek to define the one
true string for a given function.
Really. The human factors of the task you've defined are quite
>nothing the sender does will work. That is the bug, the only bug, that
fixing 'nothing will work' is far easier than 'everything will
work'. While your "something the sender does will work" doesn't
automatically mean that the task is "everything" it becomes that, as soon
as you start defining aliases.
>on what to do next with this thing. If you (or anyone within the sound of
>my keyclicks) doesn't like whatever that is, a competing document should be
>drawn up since I think that's what the IETF process calls for.
Allowed, yes, but collaborative resolution is the preferred process.
Dave Crocker +1 408 246 8253
Brandenburg Consulting fax: +1 408 249 6205
675 Spruce Dr. firstname.lastname@example.org
Sunnyvale CA 94086 USA http://www.brandenburg.com
Internet Mail Consortium http://www.imc.org, email@example.com