On Mon, 31 May 2004, Michel Py wrote:
Tim Meadowcroft wrote:
v=spf2 xml=http://www.schmerg.com/spf.xml mx -all
This way you get the best of both worlds -
let the 'market(s)' decide how much they want XML...
It does require developing two standards (spf2 and XML) but having both
of them available is the only way to let the market decide which one it
will adopt.
I suggested separating SPF and XLM by function. SPF uses SPF syntax and
handles authentication before DATA. XML goes in its own DNS records,
the _ep space like it does now, and handles authentication after DATA.
Since SPF doesn't do after DATA now, and CID doesn't do before DATA now,
there is no overlap. The only major change for SPFv2 would be the RFROM or
reverse source path business. The XML extensibility will be fine for
adding after DATA things like domainkeys, various cryptographic signatures,
etc, but won't screw up the nice lightweight SPF syntax for basic MAIL FROM
authentication. A mail receiver could skip the CID stuff and the XML
if SPF level authentication was good enough.
--
Stuart D. Gathman <stuart(_at_)bmsi(_dot_)com>
Business Management Systems Inc. Phone: 703 591-0911 Fax: 703 591-6154
"Confutatis maledictis, flamis acribus addictis" - background song for
a Microsoft sponsored "Where do you want to go from here?" commercial.