Re: [cobalt-users] MX record question / Raq4i

["Ben Liddicott" <ben.liddicott@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> > RFC1033 isn't an authority document; as it says at the top, it is a set of guidelines.
>
> I Think you misunderstand what i mean by 'authority', i do not mean
> authority in the sense of legal force, or any ability to require, rather,
> in the sense of 'having expert knowledge' as in , a professor of chemistry
> would be considered an authority on chemistry'

In that sense, it fails.

> > RFC1480 "does not specify an internet standard".
>
> None of them do in the typical meaning of 'standards', it is a consensus
> opinion about how the protocols should be implimented based on how
> applications are designed, and resoloutions of issues that have turned up
> during implimentation. RFC1480 is intended as a guide and clarification to
> to issues that have caused problems, in this sense it represents
> 'expert opinion', at least in comparison to random opinions from people
> taking wild guesses about how they wish the protocol worked as opposed to
> how the protocol is generally agreed to work.

That one doesn't specify a standard even in the internet meaning of standards; some of them do, some of them don't. The ones that
don't say so at the top. Basically I'm not going to agree that it is a standard if it says at the top that it is not.

> > Are there any actual standards or standard documents?
> >It would be nice to know.
>
> Yes, there are, but what do you mean by a standard? The things usually
> classified as 'standards' are just more formal declarations of consensus,
> ANSI is just a collection of representatives from industry that write
> documents that other industries have formally agreed to follow in regards
> to implimentation. The RFC's are documents that the internet community has
> considered and generaly agreed to follow, how much difference , other than
> pure formality, is there? No one can 'enforce' ISO or ANSO 'standards' as
> law either really, they just can't claim to be compliant with them if they
> are ignoring them.
>

Actually I meant "standards" in the sense of actually documenting a standard way of doing things that will actually work if
followed. RFCs generally fall down there.

All in all, I think internet standards are, shall we say, low.

They seem to me to be low in quantity, low in quality, low in availability of authoritative information about them, and low in
consistent implementations.

So to repeat my question: Where should I go for this information?

Cheers,
Ben Liddicott
----- Original Message -----
From: <flash22@xxxxxxx>