spf-discuss
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: The case for XML

2004-01-22 02:23:36
On Wed, Jan 21, 2004 at 08:28:13PM -0700, Aredridel wrote:

| One of the biggest problems with such easily extended syntax is that
| something has to interpret said synyax.
| 
| Speccing the extensions is trivial compared to getting the software to
| handle them deployed.  How hard it is to parse isn't going to affect
| that terribly -- convincing everyone that it's needed and good is the
| hard part.

Which is why I have (and still do) promote the idea of push policy back to
the source of policy.  Let the domain owner have the data detail and make
the decision themselves.  Afterall, they, or designated parties, sent it,
if it is legitimate.  SPF already allows this using the exists mechanisms.
I'm sure someone expert in Java and XML and tie the appropriate components
together and make it be the DNS server that makes the decisions based on
policy coded in XML (and possibly merged from multiple user information
that can be supplied to them in XML as well).

-- 
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Phil Howard KA9WGN       | http://linuxhomepage.com/      http://ham.org/ |
| (first name) at ipal.net | http://phil.ipal.org/   http://ka9wgn.ham.org/ |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

-------
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>