[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Additional appeal against publication of draft-lyon-senderid-* in regards to its recommended use of Resent- header fields in the way that is inconsistant with RFC2822
Yes, that was a very good article.
> incompatible with RFC2822
I'm still a bit lost how this could actually _break_ something.
For obvious reasons the author can't say "updates 2822", how
should he fix it ? As you said the 822 issue is mentioned in
the senderid-pra draft.
Do you want more "security considerations", something along
the line of "PRA-participants agree to break an explicit MUST
in 2822" ?
> I disagree that it should be ignored quite so easily because
> RFC822 is still listed as Internet Standard where as RFC2822
> is just Proposed Standard.
Touché. OTOH the author isn't responsible for this "detail" -
in the spirit of TINW (for an IETF-we) it's "our" fault. Bye.