spf-discuss
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Question about extending SPF

2004-01-12 14:07:19
Gmane rewrite my letter. I changed back.

I just thinking about publishing subaddress separator symbol.

Maybe "... -all sep:-" can express that the domain uses subaddressing so the source of the emails from 'local-ext1 AT domain' and 'local-ext2 AT domain' is the same and the source can be described as 'local AT domain'. (Which is not necessary a valid email address.)

Wechsler wrote:
"all" is logically the last mechanism. Only modifiers should logically go after it.

"sep" as you describe it is a non-standard mechanism (and it should be a modifier, not a mechanism) which modifies the meaning of the entire rest of the spf record. I consider this unwise, as it will almost globally be ignored.

Ignoring "sep" by today SPF parsers is a good news for me.

I mean "sep" just give additional information about the domain addressing policy. "If you see an email from us you can identified the source of the email by deleting some characters from the sender address." It is not related to the transport path but it is related to the domain (addressing policy).

In fact it appears to me that the same task can already be acheived using macro expansion. If you want to specify "The part of localpart before the first -", use %{l1-}

I would like to find a method for publishing that a domain uses TMDA, VERP, etc like subaddressing. Macros does not express it.


z2

-------
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-02.9.4.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>