In <20040402210405(_dot_)GL5373(_at_)dumbo(_dot_)pobox(_dot_)com> Meng Weng
Wong <mengwong(_at_)dumbo(_dot_)pobox(_dot_)com> writes:
| Proposed minimal SPF implementations for mail receivers:
Both Level 0 and the INCLUDE and EXISTS parts of Level 1 would be
required fro a minimal implementation.
The specification is the minimal implementation. Where parsing and
interpreting are concerned, there are no optional parts.
I agree that the SPF spec is a good minimum. It was designed that
way. I know of no SPF implementation that doesn't try to support most
of the SPF spec, and most try to support all of it.
Not supporting include:, exists: and macros at this stage of SPF
adoption would be a really bad idea since you couldn't use the
spf.trusted-forwarder.org global whitelist. There are still a
significant number of major forwarders that have not adopted SRS and
are unlikely to do so in the near future. Any SPF implementation that
doesn't use support both local and global whitelists of known good
forwarders is not, IMHO, complete enough to be used. While the need
for the global whitelist will certainly fade away over time, local
white lists are probably always going to be needed in many cases.
-wayne