Peter Saint-Andre wrote: > Tomasz Sterna wrote: >> On Cz, 2007-12-20 at 07:58 -0700, Peter Saint-Andre wrote: >>> Maybe this is something we can recommend >>> in XEP-0205 (Best Practices to Discourage Denial of Service Attacks) >>> but >>> I don't think it belongs in the RFC. >> And what if that protective action directly violates RFC? >> Ie. RFC says server MUST deliver the stanza... > > Which is better? > > (1) Allow a denial of service attack. > > (2) Strictly adhere to the letter but not the spirit of the RFC. > > We can add helpful caveats to the RFC, but that makes it harder to read > and understand.
Done: http://svn.xmpp.org:18080/changelog/XMPP/?cs=1489 http://svn.xmpp.org:18080/browse/XMPP/trunk/internet-drafts/draft-saintandre-rfc3920bis-05.xml?r1=1451&r2=1489 http://svn.xmpp.org:18080/browse/XMPP/trunk/internet-drafts/draft-saintandre-rfc3921bis-05.xml?r1=1335&r2=1489 PEter -- Peter Saint-Andre https://stpeter.im/
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
