At 12:13 23-01-2012, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
I think it's better to just change "contains" to "can contain", and
similarly "includes" to "can include". The specific rules for
different tokens (e.g., local-parts vs. domain names) might be a
little different. For example, base64 won't work universally on
domain names, but base32 would. So the transformation needs to meet
certain requirements, and so does the encoding. But those two
requirement sets come from different places, so I prefer the
partitioning as we have it.
As for the length, I think we should be more general and just say
there may be other constraints that also need to be observed in the
replacement.
That sounds fine.
I don't think we want to get into the mechanics of various methods
at all. To some extent, that's what got us into trouble in the
first place, and also those issues are very well described and
understood in existing documentation. We don't need to repeat any
of that here.
+1
Regards,
-sm
_______________________________________________
marf mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/marf
