> With the current spec, I'd say that for values of t and x that have > been mentioned so far, maybe what happens at t+2*(x-t) is reasonable > to think about, but we can, and according to our charter, should, > entirely ignore what might or might not happen at t+100*(x-t).
Entirely agree, and also agree that there's no way we're going to define algorithms or bright line rules for this. > PS: Sorry for jumping in on this one, but the topic is an enormous > rathole. No kidding. So I hope we can ditch the rathole part and concentrate on the large useful parts we understand. Regards, John Levine, [EMAIL PROTECTED], Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies", Information Superhighwayman wanna-be, http://www.johnlevine.com, Mayor "I shook hands with Senators Dole and Inouye," said Tom, disarmingly. _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
