reg/unreg testing

[David Relson]

On Thu, 2 Sep 2004 08:55:05 -0400
Tom Anderson wrote:

> From: "David Relson" <relson at osagesoftware.com>
> > Looking at these results, it's reasonable to say that protection
> > against bad registration and unregistrations does matter -- a little
> > -- and isn't critical.
> 
> As Greg said, "this is far more extreme corruption than should ever be
> encountered in practice," so you should expect a much smaller effect
> from occasional mistakes, and such an effect would be corrected with
> further registrations anyway.  If you did have an extra false negative
> or two, you would just correct them, and that'd be that.  I would go
> so far as to say that protection against this doesn't really matter at
> all.  In fact, note that you benefitted from occasional
> double-registrations.  If in doubt, register again.  No harm.
> 
> Tom

OK.  

Message tagging was suggested to prevent mistakes during
registration/unregistration.

We've seen some evidence that message tagging isn't necessary.  It's may
still be useful.

We've heard from someone opposed to message tagging.

Who wants/needs message tagging?  Why?  Have you any evidence?