Re: SPF v1 draft for review

spf-discuss

Re: SPF v1 draft for review

2004-10-09 21:19:38


On Oct 6, 2004, at 12:03 AM, Commerco WebMaster wrote:

I am guessing that
   %{lr}                      strong-bad
should actually be
   %{lr}                      bad-strong

Nope: %{lr} will split on periods (as there was no split charactergiven after the 'r'). Hence, "strong-bad" is split into one item,"strong-bad", the list of one item is reversed to "strong-bad", thenjoined with periods into "strong-bad".


        - Mark

[More with this subject...]

<Prev in Thread]	Current Thread	[Next in Thread>
SPF v1 draft for review, Mark Lentczner Re: SPF v1 draft for review, Anne P. Mitchell, Esq. <amitchell(_at_)isipp(_dot_)com> Re: SPF v1 draft for review, Commerco WebMaster Re: SPF v1 draft for review, Mark Lentczner <= Re: SPF v1 draft for review, jpinkerton SPF v1 draft for review, Roger Moser Re: SPF v1 draft for review, Peter Karsai Re: SPF v1 draft for review, Roger Moser Re: SPF v1 draft for review, Peter Karsai Re: SPF v1 draft for review, Mark Re: SPF v1 draft for review, Peter Karsai Re: SPF v1 draft for review, Mark Lentczner RE: SPF v1 draft for review, terry Re: SPF v1 draft for review, spf

Previous by Date:	Idea! Let's force adoption., Dan Barker
Next by Date:	Re: Re: I-D ACTION:draft-leibzon-responsible-submitter-00.txt (fwd), Mark Shewmaker
Previous by Thread:	Re: SPF v1 draft for review, Commerco WebMaster
Next by Thread:	Re: SPF v1 draft for review, jpinkerton
Indexes:	[Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists]