Meng Weng Wong wrote:
On Wed, Apr 21, 2004 at 10:56:35AM -0700, Hallam-Baker, Phillip wrote:
|
| The sender has no control over what the receiver does with the
| information, and neither does this group.
|
While this may be true, I do not think it is proper for the
specification to admit it.
I want to explain why I'm concerned about vagueness in the spec
regarding receiver behaviour. This is an important issue for me because
it's one of the few points where we seem to have significant
disagreement. We do agree on pretty much everything else.
My main concern is customer calls. From an ISP point of view, anything
that causes complaints from customers to tech support is bad. If
there's no good answer to the complaint, things get even worse.
I think that it is pretty clear (to me at least). When a sender
publishes MARID records, there are two specific things the sender can
choose from: either 2821 values or 2822 values (or both). The receiver
is provided with two specific validation paths: one for 2821 and another
for 2822. So it is not a free for all but rather we narrow things down
to two very specific paths, both on the sender and receiver's parts.
Of course, the point that Phill is making is still valid - while we may
provide a spec and recommend behaviour on part of the receiver, the
receiver is still free to do whatever they want. However, we are
defining two specific validation paths.
Yakov
-------
Yakov Shafranovich / asrg <at> shaftek.org
SolidMatrix Technologies, Inc. / research <at> solidmatrix.com
"Some lies are easier to believe than the truth" (Dune)
-------