Re: Various draft problems

New Message Reply About this list Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

From: Erland Sommarskog (sommar@algonet.se)
Date: Sat Apr 21 2001 - 13:53:00 CDT


John Stanley <stanley@peak.org> writes:
> Erland Sommarskog (sommar@algonet.se):
> >What I am uncertain of is that they can define a header as local all
> >on their own.
>
> You just are not listening. Site B didn't do it "all on their own". Site B
> didn't do it at all. But even so, why do you think you have a veto power
> over this?

I'm sorry if I have reading this half asleep. I took your original
story as somewhat loose. After all it was a hypothetical example, so
it could include several alternatives.

But OK:
> How can you be supporting "my position" when you don't even know what it
> is? Of course Site C knows it is local, they read the documentation for
> the system that Site B is running that inserts it and have decided they
> want to keep the header. I've said twice now that Site C knows what the
> header is and wants to keep it, but it CANNOT because this draft says it
> MUST be removed.

But then it is clear where the problem arises: when Site B or whoever
defined the header said "this is a Local Header according to the definition
in Usefor". Then they also said "This header MUST be removed by other sites".

But the actual problem is really much smaller. Because even though Site C
MUST remove the header, they are permitted to insert its own local header,
and provided it is not precluded by the documents that define your
hypothetical nocem-header, they could take the value from the header
they just removed.

Of course, this begs the question whether the definition is really
meaningful, but that's another story. For Xref it is anyway.

> In this draft, which does not have any idea what the header is or what it
> does, but says that it MUST be removed when the article is tranported to
> another site.

Usefor sets the definition. Later RFCs or similar documents are free
to use it, but they should of course know what they are doing. Thus,
Usefor knows damn well what kind of header this is, because Usefor
gave the definition of a Local Header.

--
Erland Sommarskog, Stockholm, sommar@algonet.se


New Message Reply About this list Date view Thread view Subject view Author view


This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29.