1. Result names - libspf2 still uses the pre-RFC result names of unknown
and error. In RFC 4408 terms unknown = permerror and error = temperror.
2. Processing limits - unlike other pre-RFC 4408 libraries, libspf2 at
least uses the same processing limit structure (other libraries used a
recursion depth limit) and so if someone would evaluate that code it should
be relatively straightforward to identify and patch libspf2 to align it to
RFC 4408 (as your patch did with MX limits), but no one has done a review
of all the limits to determine what all the required changes are.
There are probably others, but they are likely all low probability corner
It seems to support some modifiers not in the RFC (default= is one).
Bottom line though this shouldn't affect libspf2's interoperability
with other fully RFC compliant SPF implementations (apart
from maybe the limits issue), or am I mistaken here?
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
Description: This is a digitally signed message part