[Mimedefang] Potential for Business mail servers tonot havereverse DNS
john at rudd.cc
Sun Sep 24 00:58:42 EDT 2006
Les Mikesell wrote:
> On Sat, 2006-09-23 at 00:30, John Rudd wrote:
>>> If a SHOULD could be interpreted as a requirement, there
>>> wouldn't be any MUST's.
>> There is absolutely no logic to your statement.
>> A MUST is _always_ a requirement. Even if a SHOULD is sometimes treated
>> as a requirement for service (as that RFC clearly states) it does not
>> displace the need for MUSTS, because a SHOULD is _not_ _always_ a
>> requirement for service.
> A SHOULD is _never_ a requirement.
The section of RFC 1912 that I quoted directly contradicts you. It
lists a should, and outlines that the consequence for deviating from the
should may be denial of service. Therefore, it specifically states that
a should _may_be_ a requirement for service. Period.
More information about the MIMEDefang