On Tue, 16 Jan 2007, Stuart D. Gathman wrote:
On Tue, 16 Jan 2007, Julian Mehnle wrote:
And finally, here's an analogy: Should "v=spf1 exp=-all" (essentially a
missing space) be considered a Neutral instead of a PermError?
PermError, because the exp= is not empty, and is not a domain-spec. No
ambiguity in the spec there. (And maybe worth a test case...)
Here's an idea to drive Julian crazy, what with allowing both results:
v=spf1 exp= -all # gets FAIL, because we like to reject
v=spf1 exp= ?all # gets Permerror, because neutral
# won't help us reject
I.e., initially ignore empty exp, but take note. If the SPF result doesn't
help reject the message, permerror. When filtering 11000 spams down to 10
legit messages, it's all about rejection.
However, suppose I come around to Julian's view, and make exp=
a permerror. Then in pyspf LAX mode, I would note the permerror,
but ignore it to get an SPF result. The result ignoring
permerror is used for policy (e.g. reject on fail), but Received-SPF shows the
permerror (assuming message is accepted), and X-Guessed-SPF shows the result
ignoring the empty exp=. That pretty much does what I want, and
what Julian wants.
So I am changing my "vote" to abstain, and will let the remaining combatants
determine which way it is.
Stuart D. Gathman <stuart(_at_)bmsi(_dot_)com>
Business Management Systems Inc. Phone: 703 591-0911 Fax: 703 591-6154
"Confutatis maledictis, flammis acribus addictis" - background song for
a Microsoft sponsored "Where do you want to go from here?" commercial.
Sender Policy Framework: http://www.openspf.org/
Archives at http://archives.listbox.com/spf-discuss/current/
To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your
please go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/?list_id=735