spf-discuss
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: THIS POLL IS USELESS

2004-05-31 02:21:30
     As long as I've been lured out of lurker status...

* Yes, extensibility IS a requirement, and version numbers don't cut it.

     I'm not convinced--either that extensibility is a requirement, or
that, if it is, version numbers "don't cut it".  SPF is complex enough as
it is, without having to worry about who implements what extended features.
As Michael Brumm points out, extensibility can lead to non-uniform
practices, and when such practices can cause mail to be rejected, or even
lost (I know silently dropping mail is against the rules, but with enough
leeway someone's going to find a way to do it), I'd consider that a Bad
Thing.

     Even if you do want extensibility, what's wrong with version numbers?
If nothing else, they let you define explicit sets of semantics, which
considerably limits the potential for misinterpretation as opposed to the
nearly limitless combinations possible if XML or a similarly non-versioned
syntax was used.

     That said, I realize that while working out the wrinkles, having
easily-extendable syntax and semantics makes things simpler on the design
end.  Unfortunately, when extensibility is no longer desirable, you're left
with a whole lot of momentum to try and turn around.

  --Andrew Church
    achurch(_at_)achurch(_dot_)org
    http://achurch.org/