On Fri, 2004-05-28 at 13:55, Stuart D. Gathman wrote:
I couldn't locate the example with a quick scan of the archives, but
one idea was something like this:
v=spf1 mx (include:otherdomain.tld|error:(mx:otherdomain.tld ?all)) -all
I can see already I got it wrong, so don't miss the point. The point is that
any such scheme is going to require nesting syntax (supplied by parenthesis
above). And as soon as you require nesting syntax, you might as well
use XML.
Yes, XML makes sense in that case. Unfortunately, that case is not
expressible in SPF1 syntax, so it doesn't make much sense to use XML for
SPF1. If XML is going to be supported though, I can see the use of XML
for later implementations (baring all the other problems that using XML
exposes us to) -- so it does make sense to have current SPF parsers also
grok XML format, to avoid requiring another upgrade cycle. This would
be a lot easier to do today if those who do support XML would publish a
schema so that implementation can start.
--
Andy Bakun <spf(_at_)leave-it-to-grace(_dot_)com>