Newsgroups: news.software.nntp
Path: utzoo!henry
From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer)
Subject: Re: NNTPD hates Message-IDs with TWO '@'s in them.  (BIG log file attached to this posting)
Message-ID: <1991Jun18.213516.13908@zoo.toronto.edu>
Date: Tue, 18 Jun 1991 21:35:16 GMT
References: <1991Jun13.043253.20660@zoo.toronto.edu> <6014@gazette.bcm.tmc.edu> <1991Jun17.192620.27934@zoo.toronto.edu> <6039@gazette.bcm.tmc.edu>
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology

In article <6039@gazette.bcm.tmc.edu> sob@tmc.edu (Stan Barber) writes:
>>... it is not entirely clear that it is *not* ok, because it's less than
>>crystal clear just whose rules apply.
>I very much disagree. RFC1036 CLEARLY says that where RFC1036 and RFC822
>differ, RFC822 is taken to be correct. I don't believe that this is 
>can be debated ...

It can't be debated, but it is nonsensical.  1036 explicitly differs from
822 on a number of points; that statement *has* to be read with a different
meaning than its literal one.  The most plausible interpretation is that
822 dominates *except* where 1036 is imposing additional restrictions --
so that 1036 can stiffen but not relax 822 rules -- but the standard
does *not* say that and the matter cannot be resolved merely by pointing
to the existing wording.  1036 contradicts itself, and just how you resolve
the contradiction matters.

>>>Does this mean we need a new RFC that sez which RFC822/1123 fields we will
>>>follow as defines and which we won't?
>>
>>No, we need some clarifications in 1036 about its relationship to 822.  Plus
>>preferably a tightening-up of its spec for message IDs ...
>
>I think you mean the answer is really YES. You say "NO" and then go on to
>state that we need some clarification. How does this community clarify things?

In this case, by revising an old RFC rather than writing a new one.  The
existing document does precisely what you were suggesting, i.e. amends 822
for purposes of news rather than mail, it just doesn't do it clearly and
precisely enough to resolve some issues without guesswork and appeals to
what someone thinks the authors probably meant.
-- 
"We're thinking about upgrading from    | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
SunOS 4.1.1 to SunOS 3.5."              |  henry@zoo.toronto.edu  utzoo!henry
