IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: deprecating Postel's principle- considered harmful

Joe Touch <touch@strayalpha.com> Wed, 08 May 2019 13:18 UTC

Return-Path: <touch@strayalpha.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 236031200B7 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 8 May 2019 06:18:11 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.218
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.218 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_NEUTRAL=0.779, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=strayalpha.com
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 mbi3Tke4q4Kn for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 8 May 2019 06:18:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from server217-3.web-hosting.com (server217-3.web-hosting.com [198.54.115.226]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0EE1B1200DF for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 8 May 2019 06:18:09 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=strayalpha.com; s=default; h=To:References:Message-Id: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Cc:Date:In-Reply-To:From:Subject:Mime-Version: Content-Type:Sender:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id: List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=Tmoa2hLA8krqkh8XoZCG5xkUTVXAhMb52dlpNs0kUfI=; b=V0gT4mSUJ742BCsZ1bNRIxJee /aQFquFEO0Y8ru3QCGylLGGpHgZ0yBZjnM4pB8XqgdNNQlcg1fTfo74qRKTEoq77U/yE6lYfcCBa4 pHtSkyHgnUJ0nb1hY5JJFHif/D3KQ/EtkYIhImpvY3+40+Jwu/k2iF5qcFuMUfVB7+HvX7jvOiFbl NznJbb+51eF7Yynq5NEB63HVnpKzXzNzl8mv3qSZCQA9UMW6x5kMe4Guu20KqWO4DKUfjYUihZ58g I71gaxqcRzfWiqby7Ts9DEsvkLY5kmhfic+DKMF9txsfKDbfpZDRnDx5axRXEc0xf0a8PxeSzqYYb DQxHbuZ8g==;
Received: from cpe-172-250-240-132.socal.res.rr.com ([172.250.240.132]:62950 helo=[192.168.1.16]) by server217.web-hosting.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.91) (envelope-from <touch@strayalpha.com>) id 1hOMSS-00215O-Cl; Wed, 08 May 2019 09:18:08 -0400
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail-B77FFE16-80D0-4F8E-8246-C9A419E14CAD"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
Subject: Re: deprecating Postel's principle- considered harmful
From: Joe Touch <touch@strayalpha.com>
X-Mailer: iPad Mail (16E227)
In-Reply-To: <CAKHUCzwa89Qd6PD2EtkZU1LnT+1ZSsNiMQGAPnu5P_r=bvgMLg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 08 May 2019 06:18:03 -0700
Cc: "ietf@ietf.org" <ietf@ietf.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <10DC85D6-A9D1-4B4F-905D-4BD87D2F95EA@strayalpha.com>
References: <F64C10EAA68C8044B33656FA214632C89F024CD3@MISOUT7MSGUSRDE.ITServices.sbc.com> <CALaySJJDHg5j9Z7+noS=YXoNROqdsbJ6coEECtLtbJ6fWJ3xsQ@mail.gmail.com> <DBD4837F-299B-497C-8922-AFF858B06C0F@strayalpha.com> <CAKHUCzwa89Qd6PD2EtkZU1LnT+1ZSsNiMQGAPnu5P_r=bvgMLg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Dave Cridland <dave@cridland.net>
X-OutGoing-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - server217.web-hosting.com
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - strayalpha.com
X-Get-Message-Sender-Via: server217.web-hosting.com: authenticated_id: touch@strayalpha.com
X-Authenticated-Sender: server217.web-hosting.com: touch@strayalpha.com
X-Source:
X-Source-Args:
X-Source-Dir:
X-From-Rewrite: unmodified, already matched
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/lXxA-t7Jx32giYeN5vDs7MrRj94>
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: Wed, 08 May 2019 13:18:11 -0000


On May 8, 2019, at 12:05 AM, Dave Cridland <dave@cridland.net> wrote:

>> *NONE* of it is about tolerating bugs or errors, nor is it about allowing arbitrary behavior for senders. 
>> 
> 
> Sure about that?
> 
> From RFC 760:
> 
> That is, it should be careful to send well-formed datagrams, but should accept any datagram that it can interpret (e.g., not object to technical errors where the meaning is still clear).
> 
> The parenthetical example is explicitly stating that a datagram with a technical error should still be accepted.

Your cut off the part about the meaning being clear.

And technical error doesn’t necessarily mean bug. It could mean specification error.

If you stick with the “meaning is clear” part, it’s safe. It’s when we get into what things might, could, or probably mean that there be dragons.

Joe

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email