Re: Second, revised MDN Implementation Report

On 9/30/02 at 4:01 PM -0400, Keith Moore wrote:

>(a) is it really harder to provide a default for unrecognized keywords

There is a default for unrecognized keywords already provided by the 
extension mechanism.

>(b) isn't there at least some need to support MDNs generated 
>according to the old RFC?

There is certainly no demonstrated need since there aren't more than 
1 interoperating implementations. Of course, they *are* supported by 
the default for unrecognized keywords, but since we can't establish 
that two people came up with the same semantics for those keywords in 
two implementations, there is no need for further support than "I 
don't know what this means."

Draft Standard documents existing practice.

pr
-- 
Pete Resnick <mailto:[email protected]>
QUALCOMM Incorporated - Direct phone: (858)651-4478, Fax: (858)651-1102