On Tue, May 03, 2005 at 11:42:16AM -0700,
ned(_dot_)freed(_at_)mrochek(_dot_)com wrote:
I'm not sure why this was controversial the last time, but I'm hoping
it was only the way I said it and not what I was saying. If this
is still a bad suggestion for some reason, I'd like to hear why..
It was controversial because you suggested replacing knowledge of the
recipient's address with simply using the current envelope recipient address.
I
don't think encouraging implementations to rely solely on envelope recipient
address information is a good idea.
I haven't changed what I was suggesting at all, at least not in my mind.
Sorry if it was not clear the first time; if it's better this time, I'm
glad.
I have no problem calling out that the current envelope recipient address
as an additional source of information for this check. I'll add text to
this effect to the revision.
Cool.
Yours,
mm