On Wed, 21 Jan 2004, Meng Weng Wong wrote:
On Wed, Jan 21, 2004 at 11:10:27AM -0800, Kelson Vibber wrote:
| <ep
|
xmlns='http://spf.info/1'><out><m><ip4>152.163.225.0/24</ip4></m><m><ip4>205.188.139.0/24</ip4></m><m><ip4>205.188.144.0/24</ip4></m><m><ip4>205.188.156.0/24</ip4></m><m><ip4>205.188.157.0/24</ip4></m><m><ip4>205.188.159.0/24</ip4></m><m><ip4>64.12.136.0/24</ip4></m><m><ip4>64.12.137.0/24</ip4></m><m><ip4>64.12.138.0/24</ip4></m><m><ptr>mx.aol.com</ptr></m><all>?</all></out></ep>
|
| It jumps from 210 chars to 387 chars - still under the limit for UDP, but
| more than a 50% increase in size.
But that shows that AOL, which is possibly the biggest ISP on the
planet, can fit under the 512 byte limit, so nobody else should have a
problem.
It also shortens the amount of useful information that AOL could put into
an SPF record. If AOL wanted to tighten the announcement to /27's or
/26's, instead of /24's, or wanted to add a large number of additional
/24's as they add capacity, the amount of headroom below the 512 byte UDP
limit drops dramatically.
XML would not be a wise choice for SPF.
-dave (owner of a single /32 SPF record)
-------
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?¡