spf-discuss
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: mail administrator certification example

2004-07-30 08:49:06
Then EVERY mailserver must be re-written as this does not conform to binary
math. You are working with a binary number system that has constraints. What
does xxx.yyy.zzz.3/24 mean.

Does it mean xxx.yyy.zzz.0 to xxx.yyy.zzz.255 or does it mean xxx.yyy.zzz.3
to xxx.yyy.zzz+1.2. Next is how do you do the math in binary without
changing the principals of binary math.



----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Roger B.A. Klorese" <rogerk(_at_)queernet(_dot_)org>
To: <spf-discuss(_at_)v2(_dot_)listbox(_dot_)com>
Sent: Friday, July 30, 2004 11:33 AM
Subject: Re: [spf-discuss] mail administrator certification example


John Keown wrote:

That would violate ip address notation and if spf accepts your example
then
spf NEEDS to be fixed before it one has to re-write all routing table and
routers on the internet.

What I am saying is xxx.yyy.zzz.1/24 does not conform to ip4 address
space
and has no meaning. Now if we ant to change the rules then we need to do
that.




Then it's time to fix CIDR conventions to make them more useful.  Having
1.2.3.4/28 or foo.bar.com/28 be legal and understood as "the /28 that
includes foo.bar.com" or "the /28 that includes 1.2.3.4" is very useful
(and used to be accepted in Postfix before anal-retentiveness about the
need for the left side of the CIDR notation to conform to the bit
pattern struck).

The SPF guys got it right.  The convention is unwieldy and unnecessarily
limited.

-------
Sender Policy Framework: http://spf.pobox.com/
Archives at http://archives.listbox.com/spf-discuss/current/
Send us money!  http://spf.pobox.com/donations.html
To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your
subscription,
please go to
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=spf-discuss(_at_)v2(_dot_)listbox(_dot_)com