Received: from localhost by CS.UTK.EDU with SMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK) id QAA11011; Tue, 9 Jan 1996 16:28:49 -0500 Received: by CS.UTK.EDU (bulk_mailer v1.3); Tue, 9 Jan 1996 16:26:49 -0500 Received: from po10.andrew.cmu.edu by CS.UTK.EDU with ESMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK) id QAA10688; Tue, 9 Jan 1996 16:26:46 -0500 Received: (from postman@localhost) by po10.andrew.cmu.edu (8.7.1/8.7.1) id QAA00852 for drums@cs.utk.edu; Tue, 9 Jan 1996 16:26:43 -0500 Received: via switchmail; Tue, 9 Jan 1996 16:26:42 -0500 (EST) Received: from hogtown.andrew.cmu.edu via qmail ID ; Tue, 9 Jan 1996 16:24:42 -0500 (EST) Received: from hogtown.andrew.cmu.edu via qmail ID ; Tue, 9 Jan 1996 16:24:41 -0500 (EST) Received: from BatMail.robin.v2.14.CUILIB.3.45.SNAP.NOT.LINKED.hogtown.andrew.cmu.edu.sun4c.411 via MS.5.6.hogtown.andrew.cmu.edu.sun4c_411; Tue, 9 Jan 1996 16:24:39 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: Date: Tue, 9 Jan 1996 16:24:39 -0500 (EST) From: John Gardiner Myers To: drums@cs.utk.edu Subject: Re: "be liberal in what you accept" considered harmful In-Reply-To: References: writes: > Wbat's a software developer to do? A software developer is to do what a software developer has to do. Sometimes, this means holding one's nose and accepting garbage. If there is to be a move to be made from liberalism to strictness in, say, the internet mail area, it will only effectively happen as a coordinated effort by the major players. The point of my previous post was not to say that implementers should immediately start becoming nit-pickingly conservative. The point was to question/attack the "be liberal" mantra as a fundamental concept for designing Internet systems. Once it beomes no longer an axiom, we can then hopefully make engineered decisons about what or what not to accept in any specific situation. -- _.John G. Myers Internet: jgm+@CMU.EDU LoseNet: ...!seismo!ihnp4!wiscvm.wisc.edu!give!up