[ On Thursday, June 17, 2004 at 17:03:01 (-0400), David Brodbeck wrote: ]
> Subject: RE: [Exim] AOL - SPF - and EXIM
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Greg A. Woods [mailto:woods@most.weird.com]
>
> > The language you quote above is invalid, as is the self-contradictory
> > language of RFC 1123 5.2.5. No RFC is perfect, and some are clearly
> > worse than others at stepping beyond the bounds of simply specifying
> > protocols.
>
> So essentially, you criticize other people for not following the RFCs, but
> you yourself violate them at will because any language you disagree with is
> "invalid". Thanks for clearing that up.
Now where-oh-where did I ever say that RFCs are not allowed to dictate
protocol designs and specifications!?!?!?!?
(Policy, and policy implementation, is one thing -- protocol design and
implementation is another thing. Sometimes the two get mixed up pretty
tightly, but confusing them won't help anyone.)
--
Greg A. Woods
+1 416 218-0098 VE3TCP RoboHack <woods@???>
Planix, Inc. <woods@???> Secrets of the Weird <woods@???>
