On Wednesday 16 February 2011 05:19 PM, Abhijit Menon-Sen wrote:
I don't see the relevance to this discussion, so I'll digress to say that it always annoys me when Postel is quoted to justify accepting all sorts of malformed nonsense in protocol implementations. The idea is to be accepting where there is some ambiguity or different interpretations of the standard, not to accept things which are outright invalid.
Postel's Law/Maxim/Prescription/Whathaveyou has often been quoted for things other than protocol implementation, including netiquette and as a general good principle of liberalism:
http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1855
Abstract This document provides a minimum set of guidelines for Network Etiquette (Netiquette) which organizations may take and adapt for their own use. As such, it is deliberately written in a bulleted format to make adaptation easier and to make any particular item easy (or easier) to find. It also functions as a minimum set of guidelines for individuals, both users and administrators. This memo is the product of the Responsible Use of the Network (RUN) Working Group of the IETF.
- A good rule of thumb: Be conservative in what you send and
liberal in what you receive. You should not send heated messages
(we call these "flames") even if you are provoked. On the other
hand, you shouldn't be surprised if you get flamed and it's
prudent not to respond to flames.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
