Re: Address Validation (Was: Re: draft-ietf-usefor-usepro-02)

["Charles Lindsey" <chl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

In <Pine.LNX.4.53.0412101211150.14565@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> John Stanley <stanley@xxxxxxxx> writes:

>Thorfinn <thorfinn@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:

>>I also think that nobody else cares that this is the case,

>I am certain that nobody cares that this is the case.

Then why make all this fuss? 


>"Charles Lindsey" <chl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:

>>So how about, for injecting agents:

>>   2. It SHOULD verify that the article is from a trusted source, and
>>      MAY reject articles in which headers contain unverified email
>>      addresses, that is, addresses which are not known to be valid for
>>      the trusted source, though it would be perverse to reject
>>      intentionally unverifiable addresses such as those ending in
>>      ".invalid" (7.5).

>This solves the problem of de-facto invalidation of perfectly valid 
>addresses exactly how? 

It was not intended to solve the problem of de-facto invalidation of
perfectly valid addresses. Others (Thorfinn in particular) said they were
perfectly happy that a site might reject an article with a from address
which satisfied *its* concept of invalidity, irrespective of the fact
that mail sent to that address might well be delivered correctly.

>And "perverse"? Foof.

You think it would not be perverse?

-- 
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@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx      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