MIME or inline signature ?
2014-667rhzu3dc-lists-groups at riseup.net
Sat Feb 14 15:33:00 CET 2015
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On Friday 13 February 2015 at 7:41:14 PM, in
<mid:54DE535A.2060205 at sixdemonbag.org>, Robert J. Hansen wrote:
> Postel's sentiments were more, "Reject traffic that
> does not conform to the spec, even if it's in common
> use; accept traffic that conforms to the protocol spec,
> even if it's exotic; and only generate traffic that
> conforms to both spec and common use." Unfortunately,
> that loses much of the poetry of the original phrasing.
Rejecting traffic that does not conform to the spec, even if it's in
common use is counter-intuitive. It seems to be denying yourself
access to some of the incoming traffic for the sake of pedantry, which
sounds like it would harm interoperability. But, of course, the point
of having a spec is interoperability.
MFPA mailto:2014-667rhzu3dc-lists-groups at riseup.net
No man ever listened himself out of a job
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
More information about the Gnupg-users