From: Matt Curtin (cmcurtin@interhack.net)
Date: Fri Dec 20 2002 - 16:08:07 CST
John Stanley <stanley@peak.org> writes:
> As it is, there isn't a single person who has come up with a reason
> to make the entry case-sensitive, and since it was NOT in the draft
> as it appeared at last call, then adding it now requires at least
> some cogent argument for doing so.
I'm not a single person (happily married, thank you :-) but I still
came up with a good reason, that being that widely-deployed software
makes that assumption. What you're arguing is that we allow case
insensitivity, which would make it possible for someone to write a
completely USEFOR-compliant client that will create articles that INN
rejects.
> "Because Henry says so" doesn't fit that requirement.
Unless we can meet the IETF principle of "rough consensus", and I
agree with Henry.
(As already noted, I think case sensitivity in the header sucks, but
we don't have the option of creating a standards-track document that
ignores some of the most widely-deployed software in use.)
-- Matt Curtin, CISSP, IAM, INTP. Keywords: Lisp, Unix, Internet, INFOSEC. Founder, Interhack Corporation +1 614 545 HACK http://web.interhack.com/ Author of /Developing Trust: Online Privacy and Security/ (Apress, 2001)