Re: IM2000 RNASP -- identifying message stores to recipients

CC> Does this mean that (a) you see my concern with use of address 
CC> literals to specify the message store in notifications, (b) that 
CC> you are inclined to disallow such use of address literals, both, 
CC> or neither?

It means that I was thinking of a type of ostracism that apparently
neither your nor James are.  James is apparently thinking of
blacklisting where the recipient notification agent or recipient MUA 
takes the domain name supplied in the notification, performs the 
mapping to a set of IP addresses using the DNS, and then checks those 
addresses against a blacklist.  You are thinking of both (a) the 
equivalent blacklisting applied to the set of IP addresses supplied 
explicitly in the notification and (b) blacklisting where the 
blacklist contains a list of domain names rather than a list of IP
addresses.

I'm thinking of a type of ostracism that occurs before either,
where those who hold the "If you don't have a domain name then I
don't believe that you can have a legitimate message store." belief
simply discard outright all notifications that don't use domain names.

This divides recipients into two camps.  

Those that adhere to this belief then only have domain names to work 
with, and can look up both the domain names and the IP addresses that 
they map to in blacklists.  They impose the minimum requirement for 
communicating with them of "You must go through the process of dealing 
with DNS.".

Those that do not adhere to this belief do the same as the above if
domain names are supplied, and look up IP addresses in blacklists if
IP addresses and port numbers are supplied.  They choose to impose a 
lower minimum requirement for communicating with them.

It seems probable that for general Internet use most people will choose
to be in the former camp.  But as far as I can see it doesn't matter to 
those people that the protocol also allows for people to choose to be 
in the latter camp.

CC> Use of domain names will also provide some smaller supplementary benefits [...]

Use of domain names provides quite a lot of supplementary benefits,
not least among which are portability of MSRAP services and conveyance
of "current" server load information to the client.  These are the 
things that I was referring to when I said that there's a reasonable
bias towards the use of domain names.

<URL:http://homepages.tesco.net./~J.deBoynePollard/Proposals/IM2000/Architecture/message-store.html#AccessProtocols>