spf-discuss
[Top] [All Lists]

Another issue with the spec - scope differentiation

2003-11-13 10:04:43
Is it supposed to be possible for a domain to use different mechanisms for 
each scope? eg: all three of the following simultaneously:

xyz.com TXT "v=spf1 mx scope=envelope,header-from default=deny"
xyz.com TXT "v=spf1 a:a.mx.xyz.com scope=header-from default=deny"
xyz.com TXT "v=spf1 scope=errors-to default=deny"

This would be invalid according to section 2.1 because the concatenated 
directives become:

"mx scope=envelope,header-from default=deny a:a.mx.xyz.com scope=header-from 
default=deny scope=errors-to default=deny"

Which section 2.1 says is syntactically incorrect due to the multiple 
modifiers. This certainly is not intuitive given the example.

Is there another way to acheive this or is it just not supposed to be 
possible?

How about this as an alternative:

Proposal that section 2.1 should say "for each scope, relevant txt records are 
concatenated, eliminating duplicate and out-of-scope modifiers. Conflicting 
default modifiers constitute a syntax error"

If this was adopted, the the above example would resolve to the following 
three scope-specific directive-sets:

"mx scope=envelope default=deny"
"mx a:a.mx.xyz.com scope=header-from default=deny"
"scope=errors-to default=deny"

Notice how the 2nd set contains the mechanisms from both of the first two 
records in the initial example, because their scopes overlapped. The scope in 
line 1 was reduced to just 'envelope' because 'header-from' was out-of-scope 
for that line. The prior duplicate default=deny entires were simply 
eliminated prior to concatenation.

- Dan

-------
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?¡