At 03:41 PM 8/25/2004 -0400, Scott Kitterman wrote:
Before we plunge off on this tangent again, is there anyone out there
writing an SPF parser that would make any use of this "added information"?
Hoping for a "yes" answer, because I think it is "must do even if I am too
busy" because as you can see from previous post:
http://archives.listbox.com/spf-discuss(_at_)v2(_dot_)listbox(_dot_)com/200408/1072.html
That the large ISP has no choice but to set "?all" (useless setting), because
anything other than "-all" will get all kinds of incorrect mathematical
assumptions, which will lead to false positives. If it takes years for ISPs to
transistion to "-all" (100% confidence), then SPF is held back for years in
useless state (for email from those ISPs).
Do you want me to give an example based on the data in that post above?