From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Message-ID: <62243a4cfe95643aed8fd847636cbf26@terzarima.net>
To: 9fans@9fans.net
From: Charles Forsyth <forsyth@terzarima.net>
Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2008 00:02:01 +0100
In-Reply-To: <167d149dc5dbd7b482a86a140cb42fff@akira.nop.cx>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [9fans] telnet vs. godaddy whois
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 9424e18e-ead3-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

to be fair, this is one reason a few programming languages have non-trivial validation suites,
much of which check probable or historical misunderstandings,
and those suites are usually too small.  it takes a fair amount of back-and-forth through
the natural language text to build a supposedly complete specification.
the TCP/IP specification is tricky, partly because it suggests a programming interface as well,
which isn't quite the one that most people use today.  it's not just us: RFC1144 notes
	`PUSH' is a curious anachronism considered indispensable by certain members of the Internet
	community.  Since PUSH can (and does) change in any datagram, an
	information preserving compression scheme must pass it explicitly.