[101450] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: SMTP addresses in <>
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Sean Figgins)
Fri Jan 4 13:39:47 2008
Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2008 11:32:13 -0700
From: Sean Figgins <sean@labrats.us>
To: nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: <a2b2d0480801041002o724260f3w2a722136e5b9371a@mail.gmail.com>
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
Alexander Harrowell wrote:
> Because....we wouldn't have e-mail? Consider the pain of getting
> worldwide interoperability for a "notmail" system that insisted on
> strict validation...
>
The SMTP ship has already sailed, so trying to change the behavior of
email would be difficult.
I do, however, reject the notion that strict validation make
implementation of interoperability painful. If the specifications are
clearly defined, rather than allowing interpretation by the implementer,
then interoperability would be almost assured. The problem is that many
specifications in RFCs are loose and left open to interpretation by the
individual software programmers.
But, to the original question... If the customer's email is important
to the business, then you may want to accept the email that may not be
complaint to a strict interpretation of the RFC.
-Sean
