From: Bill Davidsen (davidsen@prodigy.com)
Date: Thu Mar 02 2000 - 05:33:16 CST
John Stanley <stanley@peak.org> write:
> bill davidsen writes:
>
> "May I suggest that the last paragraph read:
>
> No. It makes it look like a solvable problem, which people will try to
> solve in their own incorrect ways. How does one test "deliverable"? How
> does an injecting agent determine "not authorized"? This statement implies
> both are possible, and results in unacceptable failure modes when it gets
> it wrong.
You seem to have missed the explanation which followed this proposal.
There is no requirement that the injector make any attempt to validate
anything. There is no mention of deliverable, only "not deliverable."
Address fall into deliverable, not deliverable, and unknown. I can
determine that "postmaster@prodigy.net" is not authorised to any dialup
user, and delete the post (and send a copy to the abuse folks). I can
determine that a local address is not deliverable, and reject that.
You are reading the opposite of not deliverable as deliverable, and
that's neither what I said or meant.
Your comment on getting things wrong is a waste of electrons, any
feature can be gotten wrong, and unless you propose to forbid rejecting
articles with bogus From: I don't see any (additional) problems. Add a
MAY on the checking if you don't think that not requiring it is enough:
An injection server may choose to detect that some addresses are not
valid in form, deliverable, or authorized to the poster. If an
injecting agent determines that an address is not deliverable or not
authorized to the poster, it MUST reject the article.
-- -bill davidsen (davidsen@prodigy.com) "The secret to procrastination is to put things off until the last possible moment - but no longer" -me