Re: RFC 4408 Errata - PermError on invalid domains after macro expansion

On 25 October 2011 14:39, Scott Kitterman wrote:

> That's a confirmed errata (see the previous
> paragraph on TempError). When the spec was written,
> the intent was to reject on PermError as well.  You
> may not agree with it, but your characterization of
> the intent when it was written is not correct.  In
> any case it does not advise rejection, just
> gives advice about how to handle it if you do.

+1  That was a rather controversial issue with lots
of misunderstandings, a formal appeal, an erratum +
figure out some consensus, etc., so please let's not
repeat this procedure:

The main thing is to _document_ the correct SMTP code
IF something is rejected.  The spec. does nowhere say
that rejecting is REQUIRED, and IIRC it only goes so
far to say that rejecting FAIL is RECOMMENDED.

Your proposed text sounds fine.  Of course you cannot
suggest two incompatible solutions for the same issue
in 4408bis; even if it's mostly a theoretical problem.

-Frank