Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.php > #17965

Re: Symfony 4 - problem z wykorzystaniem Doctrine

Show all headers | View raw

Ben Bacarisse wrote:

> Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> writes:
> <cut>
>> Also, it is inappropriate to falsify address header fields.  The “From”
>> (and “Reply-To”) header fields MUST contain a *working* e-mail *address*.
> 
> Your use of MUST (in capitals) makes it seem you have the force of net
> standards behind you on this, whereas relevant RFC in fact says:

You should have *cited* it, too.

RFC 5536 is not an Internet standard yet (then it would have a “STD” number, 
like <https://tools.ietf.org/html/std1>), but a Proposed Standard on the 
IETF Standards Track.  For practical purposes, it should be called a “quasi-
standard”:

,-<https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5536>
| 
|                                                        PROPOSED STANDARD
|                                                             Errata Exist
| Network Working Group                                  K. Murchison, Ed.
| Request for Comments: 5536                    Carnegie Mellon University
| Obsoletes: 1036                                               C. Lindsey
| Category: Standards Track                       University of Manchester
|                                                                  D. Kohn
|                                                       Healing Thresholds
|                                                            November 2009
| […]

>   ... a poster who does not, for whatever reason, wish to use his own
>   mailbox MAY use any mailbox ending in the top-level domain ".invalid"

The rules have changed a little in the meantime, indeed.  With that said, 
using the “invalid” TlD for anything but testing purposes is anti-social, 
too.  As a result, it is a killfile rule not only in my configuration.

Note that “MAY” is NOT a recommendation either:

,-<https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2119>
| 
| […]
| 5. MAY   This word, or the adjective "OPTIONAL", mean that an item is
|    truly optional.  One vendor may choose to include the item because a
|    particular marketplace requires it or because the vendor feels that
|    it enhances the product while another vendor may omit the same item.
|    An implementation which does not include a particular option MUST be
|    prepared to interoperate with another implementation which does
|    include the option, though perhaps with reduced functionality. In the
|    same vein an implementation which does include a particular option
|    MUST be prepared to interoperate with another implementation which
|    does not include the option (except, of course, for the feature the
|    option provides.)

That is, *using* “.invalid” is “truly optional”.  A newsreader or mailreader 
*need NOT* recognize it as invalid (the RFC that defines it is NOT on the 
Standards Track).  E-mails can be written to it, and the inevitable bounces 
are allowed to happen.  That is not something that a poster should want to 
happen to people who could help them with their problem or want to engage 
with them in friendly private contact (for giving off-topic advice, or 
discuss common interests).
   
> This is not how the OP "munged" the mailbox, but you appeared to be
> making a general point about what MUST be done, rather than pointing out
> what is usually considered to be the best thing, or simply the polite
> thing to do.

Because I did not remember it.  Also (this was not my intention here), it is 
often a good idea to be more strict in describing things to beginners so 
that they do not get the wrong idea that it would be OK to play loose with 
the (unwritten) rules.

-- 
PointedEars
Zend Certified PHP Engineer <http://www.zend.com/en/yellow-pages/ZEND024953>
<https://github.com/PointedEars> | <http://PointedEars.de/wsvn>
Twitter: @PointedEars2 | Please do not cc me./Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail.

Back to comp.lang.php | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Symfony 4 - problem z wykorzystaniem Doctrine Marek S <precz@spamowi.com> - 2019-06-07 01:39 +0200
  Re: Symfony 4 - problem z wykorzystaniem Doctrine Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2019-06-09 14:33 +0200
    Re: Symfony 4 - problem z wykorzystaniem Doctrine Marek S <precz@spamowi.com> - 2019-06-09 16:12 +0200
      Re: Symfony 4 - problem z wykorzystaniem Doctrine Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2019-06-09 19:22 +0200
        Re: Symfony 4 - problem z wykorzystaniem Doctrine Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2019-06-09 21:40 +0100
          Re: Symfony 4 - problem z wykorzystaniem Doctrine Marek S <precz@spamowi.com> - 2019-06-09 23:46 +0200
          Re: Symfony 4 - problem z wykorzystaniem Doctrine Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2019-06-10 20:55 +0200
            Re: Symfony 4 - problem z wykorzystaniem Doctrine Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2019-06-11 09:54 +0200
        Re: Symfony 4 - problem z wykorzystaniem Doctrine Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2019-06-10 01:57 +0200

csiph-web