Dan Boresjo wrote:
On Tuesday 18 November 2003 10:09 pm, Marc wrote:
[snip]
This will certainly make rollout easier, at the cost of (possibly) several
additional lookups. But those lookups only happen for domains which would
otherwise not be SPF compliant, so it is better than 'unknown'. Admins that
do not like this can change their default SPF record as they see fit.
SPF is intended to be lightweight (both in code and in bandwidth) so
that it can be implemented inside mail servers to prevent the acceptance
of invalid emails.
What you are proposing would require all mail servers to add a caching
web client to their code. Personally this no longer feels 'lightweight'
in code or in bandwidth.
I can't even think of where to start with regards to how this plays with
"driving implementation".
--Jonathan
-------
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-02.6.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?¡