Dave CROCKER wrote:
On 5/16/2011 6:44 PM, Joel Jaeggli wrote:
Will we be revising dkim rfc 4871 to explictly define whitelist as dns
name based whitelist thereby replacing the existing two usages of the term
(which involve explicitly allowing delivery on the basis of orign), or was
the term appraise in 2009 but not now?
how is non-normative discussion text in rfc 4871 relevant?
Perhaps that also means that all RFC references to cron are required to
define the term?
The beauty of RFCs is its merger of functional and technical writing
for a multi-discipline audience environment.
Ideally, the writer should find a term that is *universally"
understood. On the other hand, at times "Being Specific Is Terrific."
In this case with DKIM, the "cron" usage in MLM I-D (IMO) was
inconsistently applied; may be helpful for one audience group, but not
others.
For "DNS Whitelisting," IMV, it is more universal, although it might
be come with different perspectives and motivations. For example, the
irony (as I read the documents) is that it is based on faults
occurring of the network - using expected failure as a form to
filtering out the incompatibilities - the "bad". In that vain, we have
a form of "whitelisting."
--
Hector Santos, CTO
http://www.santronics.com
http://santronics.blogspot.com
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf