On Fri, 15 Feb 2002, Tom Limoncelli wrote: > IMHO the draft/RFC is useless if it doesn't include an explicit list.
On Fri, 15 Feb 2002, Bill Manning wrote: > beware of explict lists. Clearly there is disagreement here. > By not listing the explicit list, you are assuming that the reader is as > smart as the author. No I'm not! My smartness index in this area is low. I do not myself have an explicit list. I fear there are plenty of things I'm unaware of. I fear that trying to construct a list will be a rathole. I'm not a network hacker, I'm an MTA implementer who just happened to end up trying to push this RFC because I've seem too many DNS screwups in connection with email. > I am constantly recommending this list to clients, and it would be useful > if there was one specific RFC that I could point them to (sort of a > "drawing a line in the sand"). I'm sure the ISP community would appreciate > it also. I'm sure that a (constantly-updated) list would be really useful. I'm not convinced either that I should be involved or that it should appear in this RFC. But I await other opinions on this issue... -- Philip Hazel University of Cambridge Computing Service, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cambridge, England. Phone: +44 1223 334714.
