Comment 35 for bug 144431

David Grossberg (davidgro) wrote :

I must have missed an e-mail with your previous post sorry. Anyway, what are some of these reasons that there are any number of?

I think the practical solution to deciding which domains to drop and which to support is unfortunately that we should support at minimum any that Windows does. It is (for now at least) the de facto client implementation: If Windows didn't allow accessing sites with the leading or trailing hyphens, then tumblr etc. would not expose them.

As long as we are bickering about RFCs, I would like to propose that this situation is best covered by the first half of RFC 1958 part 3.9:

3.9 Be strict when sending and tolerant when receiving.
   Implementations must follow specifications precisely when sending to
   the network, and tolerate faulty input from the network.

(it goes on to say "When in doubt, discard faulty input silently", but I disagree with that for this instance obviously, I guess it comes down to if "faulty" means would cause problems vs merely out of spec.)