On Tue, Sep 12, 2000 at 12:25:45PM -0600, Scott D. Yelich wrote:
>
> On Tue, 12 Sep 2000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > -scott says that we should ignore rfcs rather than update them.
> > -people generally stop taking scott seriously.
>
> no... I simply wonder why it seems only the qmail camp seems to serious
> about insisting that sometimes vague RFCs should be adhered to so
> tightly when it seems to only cause more problems than fix.
If you're serious, the answer is that some people view that adherance
to standards is important even if it seems to temporarily hamper
interoperability. "Temporarily"? I'm talking the long-term view
of the Internet not the next couple of years. Standards-rot over the
last 20 years on the Internet has already caused serious problems and
blithely ignoring them, no matter how vague, is a contributor to that
standards-rot.
The fix? Change the standard. Then you'll be arguing from a position
of strength, not from the bleachers. Now you might want to try and
change the standard by coercion (nyah nyah, most of the internet email
programs ignore the standard so change dammit!) or by cooperation.
Microsoft are pretty good at the former, which is your preferred
strategy?
> > i've heard this conversation several times on the list so far and it
> > always goes like this. am i missing the ways in which this is a productive
> > conversation for anyone?
>
> You can't fix the world, but you can fix yourself?
>
> Todd -- couldn't you just put me in a kill file?
>
> Anyway, wasn't there an issue with AOL and large DNS responses?
> What ever came of that?!
Yes. AOL changed.
Regards.
