In <20040121185921(_dot_)GD6875(_at_)dumbo(_dot_)pobox(_dot_)com> Meng Weng
Wong <mengwong(_at_)dumbo(_dot_)pobox(_dot_)com> writes:
In theory, extensibility will be built in [if we use XML].
I guess I disagree with this. We *could* have allowed unrecognized
mechanisms to be ignored in SPF. I think we made the right decision
to not silently ignore typos.
I do not understand XML that well, but I can't see how new mechanisms
can be created and understood by those systems that need to check SPF
records.
I can see how typos could be silently ignored (IMHO A Bad Thing). I
can also see how you could download a description of the syntax and
not generate syntax errors, but I can't see any use to that if you
can't also download the semantics.
-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-02.9.4.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?¡