RE: Wide-Open MADRID

On Sun, 2004-05-30 at 07:48, Hallam-Baker, Phillip wrote:
> >  Limiting SPF to class C addresses does not break anything... 
> > it is a enhancement. It allows me to do MY job efficiently 
> > and effectively.
> What would a class C address be?
>
> I can't see how introducing a dependency on an address class
> scheme that was abandonded a decade ago could do anything other
> than break it.
I suspect this comment was more about the range of addresses represented
by class C.

-Doug