spf-discuss
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: considering XML

2004-01-22 10:40:04
I said that I'd save my feelings about XML and SPF for another message, and here it is:

While I'm sure many of you have branded me an XML crazed lunatic, (which might not be wholly undeserved), I actually don't think XML is appropriate for SPF at this time. My reasons are largely non-technical:

1) We are far along in adoption and implementation of the existing design 2) A large base of the community is highly resistant to XML in this context 3) Issues of wide and fast deployment trump longer term considerations - We've been living with spam long enough 4) While XML could neatly encompass a range of domain published information about mail (SPF, DomainKeys, legal policies, etc...), there is no grand vision of this yet.

There are some technical reasons I think we shouldn't use XML too, though I don't think any of these would be show stoppers if there were other compelling reasons to use XML:

5) DNS clearly works best with small records
6) It is very easy for people to hand author and read
7) The current SPF syntax is easy enough to parse (though I still worry that we need a full conformance suite to ensure parsers do the same thing in all implementations -- okay, I suppose I should get off my butt and write one...)

        - Mark

Mark Lentczner
http://www.ozonehouse.com/mark/
markl(_at_)glyphic(_dot_)com

-------
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>