From: Charles Lindsey (chl@clw.cs.man.ac.uk)
Date: Sat Jun 08 2002 - 16:03:01 CDT
In <Pine.LNX.4.10.10206061752410.27412-100000@spock.peak.org> John Stanley <stanley@peak.org> writes:
>Come on, you're almost there. You've let a MUST NOT slip into 8.2.2
>referring to policy violations, so why are you so hesitant to make the
>same statement at another point in the draft?
Because we are a Working Group that is supposed to achieve a Rough
Consensus. You have made your request ad nauseam, the WG has discussed it
ad nauseam, and the rest of the WG did not wish to make the change that
you are requesting. Therefore, the change was not made
And that MUST NOT did not "slip in". It is there for a purpose, and that
purpose is quite consistent with what the draft has to say about From,
Sender and .invalid, as Henry has been patiently explaining to you.
-- Charles H. Lindsey ---------At Home, doing my own thing------------------------ Tel: +44 161 436 6131 Fax: +44 161 436 6133 Web: http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~chl Email: chl@clw.cs.man.ac.uk Snail: 5 Clerewood Ave, CHEADLE, SK8 3JU, U.K. PGP: 2C15F1A9 Fingerprint: 73 6D C2 51 93 A0 01 E7 65 E8 64 7E 14 A4 AB A5