On 1/17/2019 8:53 AM, John Levine wrote:
In article<[email protected]
you write:
However I still feel like/requiring/ exact case is contrary to the idea
of "Be liberal in what you accept and conservative in what you send.".
Yup. See
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-iab-protocol-maintenance
a/k/a "Postel was wrong".
The common interpretation of Postel's dictum is to use it as an excuse
to ignore specification details.
That was not what he intended. Rather, he intended its use in the way
that Ned invoked:
On 1/17/2019 5:00 AM, [email protected] wrote:
Sorry, I meant to mention this in my previous response. It's one thing
when there's wiggle-room or lack of clarity in the standard. It's quite
another when things are clear, as is the case here.
Be liberal when the specification leaves room for doubt. Not when it
doesn't.
d/
ps. I don't know why the spec, here, demands case sensitivity but it is
quite clear that it does.
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
_______________________________________________
dmarc mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
