mail-vet-discuss
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [mail-vet-discuss] results should be method specific

2008-02-27 16:43:35
On 2/27/08, Michael Thomas <mike(_at_)mtcc(_dot_)com> wrote:

The current draft breaks out the meaning of the results into a method
specific section. This is an improvement over the previous draft which
didn't discuss them at all, but shoe-horning the global set of results
into method specific results seems rather contrived and arbitrary.
Why, for example, is an SSP all failure dkim-ssp=softfail? Worse is
that the current draft doesn't allow for more results than are in
that table. That means, for example, that SSP can't return NXDOMAIN
when that's what it found.

I'd like to propose that we name the results in a method specific
way, as well as remove result codes that don't seem to actually
even apply to that method.


<SNIP>


2.4.2.  SPF and Sender-ID Results

   [SPF] and [SENDERID] results are indicated with the methods spf-method
   and senderid-method respectively. The spf-method MUST
   contain a ptype of ptype-spf whose value contains the [SMTP].mailfrom or
   [SMTP].helo address. The senderid-method MUST return a ptype-senderid
   specifying the header field found using PRA defined in [SENDERID]


Michael,

Was leaving out MFROM for senderid-method intentional? That is a valid
SPF2.0 record/set of results and would exclude PRA.

Just wondering. Need to read through the rest a few more times to let
it sink in.
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to 
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html 

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>