Re: full integrity?

From: Eric Brunner-Williams in Portland Maine ^lt;brunner@nic-naa.net>
Date: Wed May 22 2002 - 20:29:45 EDT

> I like the "telling them to stuff it" idea over providing false
> information.
>
> You could choose to send a generic error message that doesn't
> distinguish between a policy rejection and a system inability to provide
> the location. This way a recipient can't tell if it's the policy or the
> infrastructure that is causing the problem. There are some problems
> with providing false information. If recipients act on that false
> information, it seems to me that lawsuits are highly likely.

Ah, I'm _with_ Randy. In fact, I'm in the same resolution cell. Heck, I _am_
Randy. What part of this rates a MUST NOT, assuming Randy and I are consenting
adults (with obscure peering arraingements)? For what technical reason?

Eric
Received on Wed May 22 20:38:09 2002

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Thu Jan 22 2004 - 12:32:23 EST