Mark Crispin wrote:

On Mon, 27 Oct 2003, Arnt Gulbrandsen wrote:


Do not attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by
ignorance/release pressure/lack of time/blah/blah. So far, every
Microsoft programmer I've spoken to seemed to try hard. (I'm not saying
they succeed, but I _am_ saying they don't seem a malicious bunch.)



I agree with Arnt on all three of the above points.


I do agree as well, however the end result is that every SMTP server writer has to add "AUTH=" EHLO hack for broken Outlook Express.
Nobody bother to fix it.


Also, the first result in google search on "SASL" will point to CMU web page. Nobody ever died from asking for help/guidance.

We're talking about a set of interrelated documents that are light on
examples and free of a test suite. I'm not greatly surprised that
people have trouble implementing them correctly.



We have seen this happen over and over again. The documents are broken.


Mark, this is not constructive. Please, suggest concrete changes.

If Microsoft programmers don't care about specs and redefine them as they
see fit, then we can say the same thing about the programmers of almost
every other SASL server.

This is an *extremely* common blunder.



Alexey


P.S. This thread doesn't belong to the IMAP mailing list.





Reply via email to