Seems like it depends on your definitions of "abusive" and "legitimate". Do you have an example?
On Feb 21, 2012, at 5:56 PM, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote: > We like to see interoperability reports contain information about features of > a protocol that are used vs. unused, so that if and when the protocol seeks > advancement along the standards track, we can decide whether we want to keep > it in the revision. > > Should we consider a protocol feature only used by abusive actors to be one > that deserves to be kept, or is only legitimate use worth considering? > > -MSK > _______________________________________________ > Ietf mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
