On 5/18/10 5:28 PM, Stephen Farrell wrote:
That doesn't seem to be about mailing lists.
I don't see that we're re-opening ADSP now and we're not
chartered for that, so I don't really see much point in
So perhaps take that discussion offlist?
Deprecating "all" to "except-mlist" and "rejectable" is about dealing
with message state changed by mailing lists. Without this state change,
there would not be an issue. IMHO, the suggestion for changing ADSP
assertions does not resolve the uncertainty, but instead creates risks
related to mailing list operation, when they then become exploitation
Perhaps John and Michael are right, and people need explicit
instruction. Nevertheless, these instructions should not be spelled out
in ADSP assertion mnemonics. That is the purpose of the RFC being
discussed. I agree, the chartered work is not aimed at changing the
spelling of ADSP assertions, but instead at explaining how they are best
used. A rose by any other name would still smell as sweet.
P.S. It turned out leaving Ireland was not as hoped.
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to