On Jan 26, 2009, at 10:03 PM, Barry Margolin wrote:
In article <gllr91$2vq...@sf1.isc.org>,
Scott Haneda <talkli...@newgeo.com> wrote:
100% right. I refuse MX's that are cnamed, and I get emails from
customers asking what is up. What is strange, and I can not figure
it
out, is that the admins of the DNS/email server always tell me this
is
the first time they have heard of it.
So you're not following the "be liberal in what you accept" half of
the
Interoperability Principle, which is intended specifically to avoid
problems due to such confusion.
Because that worked so well for HTML :)
I was thinking about that quote just the other day. To be honest, I
think it applies well to social issues, but not technical or
engineering/programming ones. The second you accept liberally, that
tells the submitter that it is ok.
I am hard pressed to think of one case in which liberally accepting
data is a good thing. It is that very expression that defines why we
have <b><p><i>sometext<p><b><i>
Just consider the ramifications of parsing that one simple string,
which is now non trivial to parse. What is C worked this way?
Just some thoughts I was having the other day.
--
Scott
_______________________________________________
bind-users mailing list
bind-users@lists.isc.org
https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users
