spf-discuss
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: new draft RFC 90% done.

2003-10-28 07:51:02

First, I apologize for being so behind on this stuff.  I realize that
we need to move quickly.  I have *not* cought up on the list traffic,
so maybe this has already been discussed.


In <20031018070524(_dot_)GU12945(_at_)dumbo(_dot_)pobox(_dot_)com> Meng Weng 
Wong <mengwong(_at_)dumbo(_dot_)pobox(_dot_)com> writes:

    Explanation  = 'exp=' *( VCHAR / SP )
                   ; the explanation string is subject to macro
                 ; interpolation.

Maybe I'm the only one, but I *really* don't like this exp= thing.

First, it does not support multiple languages.  Anyone from
Switzerland or (worse) Quebec Canada is going to want to be able to
support more than one language.

Second, I have my doubts that this will ever be widely used either by
SPF publishers or by SPF clients.  It smacks of featuritis.

Third, sticking this long(?) text in with the rest of the SPF config
means that every client that checks the SPF status will get more DNS
traffic, even if that client doesn't use it.

Fourth, there appears to be no quote requirements so this option *has*
to be the final option on the SPF TXT record.  People tend to stick
new options on the end and I suspect that a common error is going to
be that what is intended to be an option is going to get swallowed up
into the exp= text.


My suggestion is to either drop this, or do something along the lines
of most of the other options and have the exp not specify the text,
but rather specify a domain where the text can be found.

Something like "v=spf1 exp:.example.com" would look up the text in
"$(LANG).exp._client_smtp.example.com", where $(LANG) is on of the
standard(?) language tags found in I18N::LangTags::List.  So, someone
in Quebec could have both en.exp._client_smtp.example.com and
fr-ca.exp._client_smtp.example.com.


As a side benefit, these text records could be as long as you want
because they would only be used by SPF clients that want them, and
only when they actually *need* them.  If the TXT record is too large,
falling back from UDP DNS to TCP is not a problem.


-wayne

-------
Sender Permitted From: http://spf.pobox.com/
Archives at http://archives.listbox.com/spf-discuss/current/
Latest draft at http://spf.pobox.com/draft-mengwong-spf-02.txt
To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your 
subscription, 
please go to 
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname(_at_)©#«Mo\¯HÝÜîU;±¤Ö¤Íµø?¡


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