[note: implementation issues such this should probably be discussed
on the spf-devel list]
In <4017AF65(_dot_)4090601(_at_)phase(_dot_)org> Wechsler
<wechsler(_at_)phase(_dot_)org> writes:
Last time I ran it (on an older test.txt) it looked like:
http://www.infinitepenguins.net/SPF/bulktest.html
There are three "discrepancies" with the official results, but no-one
could explain the reasons for the official results when I last raised
them.
Test 6 doesn't match because the "default=" modifier is supported in
the perl and C code for backwards compatibility. I could see this
being an "error" for your purposes, although I could also see a
"warning".
Test 75 doesn't match because recursion being too deep should be an
error, not an unknown.
Test 94 should pass, I'm not sure why exactly your implementation
isn't. According to the spf1 spec, you are supposed to use
"postmaster" if no local part is found. The comment in test.txt is
wrong when it says mailer-daemon.
When I try and run it on the test.txt from M:S:Q 1.99 it copes with
pretty much everything it can parse.
Yeah, the C code also doesn't pass these later tests, but it is being
worked on.
-wayne
-------
To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your
subscription,
please go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname(_at_)Ë`Ì{5¤¨wâÇSÓ°)h