In <3067(_at_)rama(_dot_)pamho(_dot_)net> "Roger Moser"
<Roger(_dot_)Moser(_at_)rama(_dot_)pamho(_dot_)net> writes:
I suggest following syntax for the case if the SPF record is the same for
multiple SPF versions:
TXT "v=spf1 v=spf2 v=spf3 ip4:1.2.3.4 -all"
SPF version 1 ignores the additional "v=" entries as unknown modifiers.
I don't understand the point of this. Section 3.1 of the specifies
quite clearly how to deal with SPF records of different versions.
Basically, if there are records with multiple versions, you are
supposed to use the highest version that the implementation
recognizes, but fall back to the lower versions if appropriate. So,
if, as in the example above, there are no difference between the SPF
records between version 1, 2 and 3, you would just need to publish the
v=spf1 record.
See: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-mengwong-spf-01.txt
The problem with the current SenderID specs is that this section has
been dropped. Both Meng and Mark have been quite explicit that they
do *not* want to standardize SPFv1 and do not want to include support
for SPFv1 records in SenderID. They want to keep SPFv1 records open
for changes that they develop.
-wayne