You can speak for your inferrences, but you cannot speak for someone else's implication. You don't know if they are aware of some RFC that tells them they must change their net identity, nor do you know what they were trying to imply, if anything. It might not be malicious, but Demon still treat it as actionable abuse. Jumping the gun a bit, I' d say, and overreacting to boot.
Nothing is broken by doing it.
Well, in Kent's example it did. There is no rule to prevent it. But you cannot make that assumption about the string left after removing the .invalid. Author view This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 .