On Wed, 2004-01-28 at 18:45, Marc Alaia wrote:
Marc,
Wayne wrote:
Please explain why this incompatible change would justify invalidating
5000+ SPF records that are already deployed.
1) I did not propose that we change the v1 spec.
2) v1 records have nothing to do with v2 records. It is just as easy for a
process to check for "v=spfv2" as "spf=2". Therefore, it is NOT
incompatible.
3) I believe that it improves readability and makes more sense.
I believe its an unecessary change and in my opinion does not increase
readability. To be honest, what exists is quite logical.
v stands for version (key)
spf1 is a type of version (value)
v is easily associated with version. Without ever having looked at the
RFC I knew right away v=spf1 meant version spf1.
Either one of them (v=spf1 or spf=1) are easily identifiable and
readable, so it appears to be purely an issue of personal preference,
hence not anything worth considering at this stage of the game..
Cheers,
James
--
James Couzens,
Programmer
Current projects:
http://libspf.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
Wiki:
http://spfwiki.infinitepenguins.net/pmwiki.php/SenderPermittedFrom/HomePage
To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your
subscription,
please go to
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname(_at_)½§Åv¼ð¦¾Øß´ë ù1Ií-»Fqx(_dot_)com
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part