Re: [apps-discuss] Trace headers, was Adoption of draft-kucherawy-received-state?

Dave CROCKER <dhc@dcrocker.net> Sun, 15 January 2012 19:54 UTC

Return-Path: <dhc@dcrocker.net>
X-Original-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E69BE21F847C for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 15 Jan 2012 11:54:24 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id QJvKVZlGxa4H for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 15 Jan 2012 11:54:24 -0800 (PST)
Received: from sbh17.songbird.com (sbh17.songbird.com [72.52.113.17]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 57CAB21F8475 for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Sun, 15 Jan 2012 11:54:24 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.1.11] (adsl-67-124-148-117.dsl.pltn13.pacbell.net [67.124.148.117]) (authenticated bits=0) by sbh17.songbird.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q0FJsINg030586 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Sun, 15 Jan 2012 11:54:23 -0800
Message-ID: <4F132EE9.9070507@dcrocker.net>
Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2012 11:54:17 -0800
From: Dave CROCKER <dhc@dcrocker.net>
Organization: Brandenburg InternetWorking
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:8.0) Gecko/20111105 Thunderbird/8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com>
References: <20120114235207.20340.qmail@joyce.lan> <61D306C70A44794D8930CCB6@PST.JCK.COM> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1201142235000.1943@joyce.lan> <54978B203C73F673C5287DE3@PST.JCK.COM>
In-Reply-To: <54978B203C73F673C5287DE3@PST.JCK.COM>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.0 (sbh17.songbird.com [72.52.113.17]); Sun, 15 Jan 2012 11:54:24 -0800 (PST)
Cc: apps-discuss@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] Trace headers, was Adoption of draft-kucherawy-received-state?
X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
Reply-To: dcrocker@bbiw.net
List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols <apps-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/apps-discuss>
List-Post: <mailto:apps-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2012 19:54:25 -0000

On 1/15/2012 7:51 AM, John C Klensin wrote:
> This is the sort of disconnect between the specifications about
> SMTP MTAs and the specifications of header fields and their
> names that I mentioned in an earlier note and to which Dave
> Crocker took significant exception.  While I don't want to go on
> a quest for specific language, I believe that, from the MTA


Since I'm cited by name, I'll clarify that what I took exception to were 
assertions of fact that I believe to be wrong and that I asked to see documented.

Unfortunately, anyone can make any claim they feel like making.  Consequently, 
responsible technical discussion means that the making of a claim does indeed 
require someone's doing the work of providing specifics.

Typically, the person making an affirmative assertion of fact carries the 
responsibility for substantiating it.

d/
-- 

   Dave Crocker
   Brandenburg InternetWorking
   bbiw.net