> From: Adam McKenna <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2000 16:28:35 -0400
>
> On Thu, Sep 07, 2000 at 04:03:29PM -0400, Dave Sill wrote:
> > The RFC says "should" not "must" or "MUST", so Jost is correct: the
> > RFC's don't *demand* it.
> >
> > But, again, in practice, mailers do treat empty MX's in the way the
> > RFC suggests. At least, I'm not aware of any that don't.
>
> The author uses "should" in this fashion all through the document -- I am
> inclined to believe that he intends it to be more of an imperative and less
> of a suggestion.
>
> adam@beetlejuice:~$ grep should rfc974.txt | wc -l
> 29
> adam@beetlejuice:~$ grep must rfc974.txt | wc -l
> 5
Those darned RFCs with 3 digit numbers....they were so undisciplined in those
days about following the rules that hadn't been written yet. It's amazing
that the ARPAnet worked at all! ;-)
Next you'll be telling us that RFC823 requires us to use 7 bit characters in
all email.
Chris
--
Chris Garrigues http://www.DeepEddy.Com/~cwg/
virCIO http://www.virCIO.Com
4314 Avenue C
Austin, TX 78751-3709 +1 512 374 0500
My email address is an experiment in SPAM elimination. For an
explanation of what we're doing, see http://www.DeepEddy.Com/tms.html
Nobody ever got fired for buying Microsoft,
but they could get fired for relying on Microsoft.
PGP signature
