At 06:47 PM 6/15/00 -0400, Swerve wrote:
>i just tested .@swerve.com
>and it worked.
By "worked" do you mean that you successfully sent e-mail to that address
from a remote system? If so, it only proves that there is a lot of broken
software out there. (And I'm not terribly excited to see OpenSRS join the
crowd.)
>when you say its not valid, does that mean it may work on some systems and
>not on others?
It means that it violates the standard syntax for e-mail addresses and
shouldn't be relied upon to work anywhere. And even if you find a system
where it works today it may not work tomorrow if the developers of whatever
software you are using actually find a clue someplace.
Having said that, in practice the "local-part" of an e-mail address can be
anything that the destination MTA and local delivery agent understand. But
if you choose to use non-standard stuff don't come crying when it breaks
because the underlying software was changed...
>imo, it's time to revamp alot of these rules.
>including being able to use characters that are universally available on
>keyboards, and again, also getting rid of the exclusive dot.syntax.
I assume you are talking about the domains here now, since you can already
use just about any ASCII character in the local-part of an e-mail address
(Some need to be quoted). The thing is that good, relatively easy to
implement, standards are what make the system work as well as it does, and
given the distributed nature of DNS, and the problems that non-backward
compatible names would cause, I wouldn't look for major structural changes
any time soon.
>it's so tech., so engineerEsque, so limiting.
>
> i would love to see myself or someone work the domain name
>
> free
>
>no www's no .'s.
>
> exhale,
Don't hold your breath... ;-)
--Bill
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Tue Oct 19 2004 - 23:35:38 EDT