In
<1090872128(_dot_)525(_dot_)91(_dot_)camel(_at_)dhcp-163-154-36-247(_dot_)corp(_dot_)sgi(_dot_)com>
Greg Connor <gconnor(_at_)nekodojo(_dot_)org> writes:
I think the assumption hidden here is that 2821 defines transport data,
and never content, and 2822 defines content, and never transport.
Perhaps this is true, but there was LONG discussion during the first
phase of MARID about "Choice of identity to operate on" and it was
decided at the outset that we want to be able to validate BOTH 2821 and
2822 identities.
No, it was decided that we would validate the RFC2821 identities
first, and then go on to the 2822 identities.
Yes, I know, the last time I brought this up (see
http://www.imc.org/ietf-mxcomp/mail-archive/msg02598.html ), both PHB
and you said that you didn't see who identities were important. That
doesn't change the MARID charter and that doesn't change the co-chairs
ruling that 2822 identities would be considered after 2821 identities.
I dunno. Maybe rulings by co-chairs aren't important and can be
ignored.
-wayne