Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- considered harmful
S Moonesamy <sm+ietf@elandsys.com> Thu, 09 May 2019 08:18 UTC
Return-Path: <sm@elandsys.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3F7AC120108; Thu, 9 May 2019 01:18:44 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.7
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.7 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_INVALID=0.1, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (1024-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=opendkim.org header.b=30K4qXLP; dkim=fail (1024-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=elandsys.com header.b=Cr1c/RkB
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id hIfdkRgxoy_e; Thu, 9 May 2019 01:18:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx.ipv6.elandsys.com (mx.ipv6.elandsys.com [IPv6:2001:470:f329:1::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0E58E1200F9; Thu, 9 May 2019 01:18:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from DESKTOP-K6V9C2L.elandsys.com ([197.224.145.167]) (authenticated bits=0) by mx.elandsys.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id x498IK3C003736 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 9 May 2019 01:18:31 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=opendkim.org; s=mail2010; t=1557389916; x=1557476316; bh=W9Ss90W8eWAVJlNtox5HDey/XiaumsDGpxq+C87VUyw=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=30K4qXLPu+FYGMqUBstRE99Bd4Upnlvtx9rqKjnDP23xYFw8Eg8TNp+MVDEkhto6a Py4fu3uErnPFruBwEJFfE9hyiH/rZ/oXtufd4QhBcbvyeiK6nagh12+uU1yQH4hPhI le8P+PnxTB/XD6EKisdMH+sWnuLXtRVg1upAMhC4=
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=elandsys.com; s=mail; t=1557389916; x=1557476316; i=@elandsys.com; bh=W9Ss90W8eWAVJlNtox5HDey/XiaumsDGpxq+C87VUyw=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=Cr1c/RkBDUUl4HDJE9F327OfL909QLfNtORAmBccB+vGwZJxErVzTRDzoDqNrYIZf Jfn0RzsUeqlq167cCtpD1aD5Jysqeir/tAX1SN6BK8PN/X4mYvEXGjSsh9FtsSw1Zz xEoZOaUj+XcQpbmdgwJxkaFrlnLXb1jJC46+subU=
Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20190509002546.1016db88@elandnews.com>
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6
Date: Thu, 09 May 2019 01:14:49 -0700
To: Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>, architecture-discuss@ietf.org
From: S Moonesamy <sm+ietf@elandsys.com>
Subject: Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- considered harmful
Cc: Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org>, ietf@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <53a9c16c-163c-a18a-371a-f8aa8697af15@cs.tcd.ie>
References: <F64C10EAA68C8044B33656FA214632C89F024CD3@MISOUT7MSGUSRDE.ITServices.sbc.com> <CALaySJJDHg5j9Z7+noS=YXoNROqdsbJ6coEECtLtbJ6fWJ3xsQ@mail.gmail.com> <53a9c16c-163c-a18a-371a-f8aa8697af15@cs.tcd.ie>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/KSxoe-sTl6YhRNNdZAwOBDVRoEc>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 09 May 2019 08:18:44 -0000
Hi Stephen, [Cc trimmed] At 01:38 PM 07-05-2019, Stephen Farrell wrote: >Question for ya on that Barry - do you think that MUA >and mail server implementers would actually bounce >messages as strictly as Martin's document might call >for? I'm not one of those implementers, so I don't know, >but I'd not be surprised to hear that in fact they'd >continue to prioritise mail delivery (for non spam) >over protocol purity. My guess is that the implementer would continue to prioritise mail delivery by default. There is some guidance in RFC 1123 (Section 1.2.2) about the general rule. I'd say that the rule is about handling error conditions gracefully while not replicating the error throughout the network. Regards, S. Moonesamy
- RE: deprecating Postel's principle- considered ha… BRUNGARD, DEBORAH A
- Re: deprecating Postel's principle- considered ha… Barry Leiba
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Stephen Farrell
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: deprecating Postel's principle- considered ha… Andrew G. Malis
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Barry Leiba
- Re: deprecating Postel's principle- considered ha… Warren Kumari
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Tony Li
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Stephen Farrell
- Re: deprecating Postel's principle- considered ha… Adam Roach
- Re: deprecating Postel's principle- considered ha… Salz, Rich
- Re: deprecating Postel's principle- considered ha… Joel M. Halpern
- Re: deprecating Postel's principle- considered ha… Adam Roach
- Re: [IAB] [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle… Christian Huitema
- Re: [IAB] [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle… Stephen Farrell
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Matthew Kerwin
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Rich Kulawiec
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Henning Schulzrinne
- Re: [arch-d] [IAB] deprecating Postel's principle… Henning Schulzrinne
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Randy Presuhn
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Christian Huitema
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Henning Schulzrinne
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Mark Andrews
- Re: deprecating Postel's principle- considered ha… Martin Thomson
- Re: [arch-d] [IAB] deprecating Postel's principle… Randy Bush
- Re: deprecating Postel's principle- considered ha… Joe Touch
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Carsten Bormann
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Masataka Ohta
- Re: deprecating Postel's principle- considered ha… Dave Cridland
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Jari Arkko
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… John C Klensin
- Re: deprecating Postel's principle- considered ha… Joe Touch
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Henning Schulzrinne
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: deprecating Postel's principle- considered ha… Paul Wouters
- Re: deprecating Postel's principle- considered ha… Dave Cridland
- Re: deprecating Postel's principle- considered ha… Dave Cridland
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Bless, Roland (TM)
- Re: deprecating Postel's principle- considered ha… Paul Wouters
- Re: deprecating Postel's principle- considered ha… Joe Touch
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Joe Touch
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… John Levine
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Keith Moore
- Re: deprecating Postel's principle- considered ha… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Joe Touch
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Keith Moore
- Re: deprecating Postel's principle- considered ha… John C Klensin
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Joe Touch
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Henning Schulzrinne
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Stephen Farrell
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Joe Touch
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Martin Thomson
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Carsten Bormann
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… S Moonesamy
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Lloyd Wood
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Eliot Lear
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Carsten Bormann
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Eliot Lear
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Joel M. Halpern
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Bob Briscoe
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Masataka Ohta
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Aaron Falk
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Henning Schulzrinne
- Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- cons… Henry S. Thompson