In
<Pine(_dot_)LNX(_dot_)4(_dot_)44(_dot_)0505182005220(_dot_)26268-100000(_at_)bmsred(_dot_)bmsi(_dot_)com>
"Stuart D. Gathman" <stuart(_at_)bmsi(_dot_)com> writes:
On Thu, 19 May 2005, Alex van den Bogaerdt wrote:
PASS: We do trust this IP not to send forgeries (and do use it)
NEUTRAL: We don't trust this IP but it is allowed to use our name
SOFTFAIL: We don't trust this IP but some of us may (still) be
using it by mistake. Please give us some slack and do
notify us of any usage if you like
FAIL: We don't trust nor use this IP. Please don't bother us
with DSNs, auto-replies, vacation messages and the like.
I really like that. It avoids the problematic words (authorize,authentic),
and makes it crystal clear.
I like this phrasing also, but as I mentioned in another post to this
thread, the term "authorize" is very embedded in the draft, from the
title on down. The term "trust" is only mentioned a few times, so
suddenly using them in this critical spot would, IMHO, be a bad thing.
Having pondered the subject much more, I still think the only
reasonable thing we can do right now is put a blurb in the
"Terminology" section at the top explaing what the meaning of
"authorize" is in this draft. Anything else would be opening a can of
worms.
-wayne