Re: Handling of NO-WS-CTL in 2822bis

+1. Seems the best compromise to move forward.

	Tony Hansen
	[email protected]

[email protected] wrote:
> Pete asked me to post my position on this, so...
> 
> I believe that the best course of action is to remove NO-WS-CTL from
> the generate syntax, leaving it in the interpret syntax. This includes
> its use in quoted-pair/qtext, ctext, and dtext.
> 
> I think this is the right way to go because otherwise it is going to be
> tought o demonstrate interoperability moving to draft. It's especially
> important to remove it from quoted-string since those can be parts of
> addresses, but I fail to see a reason why we should retain this for
> comments or domain literals.
> 
> 				Ned
>