Re: empty quoted strings and other oddities

"Gary Feldman" <> Wed, 02 October 2002 12:31 UTC

Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by (8.11.6/8.11.3) id g92CV5L17111 for ietf-822-bks; Wed, 2 Oct 2002 05:31:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (8.11.6/8.11.3) with ESMTP id g92CV3v17107 for <>; Wed, 2 Oct 2002 05:31:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from alice ( []) by (8.11.6+Sun/8.10.2) with SMTP id g92CUrv02863 for <>; Wed, 2 Oct 2002 08:30:55 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <002001c26a0f$f05437a0$b7880fce@alice>
From: "Gary Feldman" <>
To: <>
References: <>
Subject: Re: empty quoted strings and other oddities
Date: Wed, 2 Oct 2002 08:33:36 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200
Precedence: bulk
List-Archive: <>
List-ID: <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>

>From: "Keith Moore" <>
>Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2002 11:13 AM

> > Likewise, a domain literal can consist solely of the
> > square brackets.
> so? there are lots of addresses which are valid syntax but
> not valid because the domain is not defined or the IP
> address (in the domain literal) does not exist or is not
> assigned to a host.

I'm not sure I buy that reasoning.  You seem to be saying that since it's
not possible to detect all invalid addresses syntactically that the ability
to trap some syntactically (or more than currently trapped) is irrelevant.
I disagree.  I believe it's usually faster, simpler, and more reliable to
catch errors syntactically than relying on subsequent semantics.