Subj : MSGID
To   : Bj”rn Felten
From : Rob Swindell
Date : Thu Feb 03 2022 19:36:25

  Re: MSGID
  By: Bj”rn Felten to Rob Swindell on Fri Feb 04 2022 03:54 am

 >  RS>>> If you send a netmail there, it'll reach me. But that clause is only
 > a
 >  RS>>> "should" anyway. It doesn't *have* to be a valid return address for
 > the
 >  RS>>> originating network.
 >
 >  >> Says who?
 >
 >  RS> Says FTS-0009.001:
 >
 >  RS> "The originating address should be specified in a form that
 >  RS> constitutes a valid return address for the originating network."
 >
 >    I was more thinking about how you interpret "should" to "yeah, fuck that,
 > it actually doesn't say I *have* to, so I ignore that totally, they probably
 > just added the "should" for fun".

In the language of technical specifications there is a firm differentiation between "should" (or "may") and "shall" (or "must"). The use of the word "should" is deliberate and not "just added for fun".

http://ftsc.org/docs/fta-1006.002 defines "SHOULD" to "mean that there may exist valid reasons in particular circumstances to ignore a particular item, but the full implications must be understood and carefully weighed before choosing a different course."

I'll leave it to the original poster to fully understand the implications
before choosing their course. I was just providing my own insight.
-- 
                                            digital man (rob)

This Is Spinal Tap quote #25:
Viv Savage: Have... a good... time... all the time. That's my philosophy.
Norco, CA WX: 57.4øF, 22.0% humidity, 0 mph ENE wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs
--- SBBSecho 3.14-Linux
 * Origin: Vertrauen - [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net (1:103/705)

.