James Couzens wrote:
have yet to see (or have missed) any real response to
many of the items that I rose.
For the HELO part you may have missed my questions in
<418BBA25(_dot_)45CA(_at_)xyzzy(_dot_)claranet(_dot_)de> - no idea how to find
it without NNTP, with NNTP it's available as:
<news://news.gmane.org/418BBA25(_dot_)45CA(_at_)xyzzy(_dot_)claranet(_dot_)de>
For Wayne's processing limits I supported your remark...
| *UGH* This is getting overly complex.
...in the same thread, because I'd prefer simple limits.
Mostly I'd like the draft to be useful for publishers
of sender policies, AND for implementors of check_host(),
AND for authors of auxiliary toools like wizards / test
suites / validators. Often only an editorial difference
from Wayne's style, when he "hides" important stuff in a
single sentence without motivation / explanation, where
it could be "lost" (e.g. zone cut or HELO).
I look forward to the end of this political stint so
that work can commence on ratifying the final classic
draft.
ACK. Anything which was never mentioned in v=spf1 drafts
like scopes / positional modifiers / optional properties /
accredit= / etc. should go into seaparate documents when
it's compatible with existing v=spf1 tools and policies,
resp. into a future SPF when it cannot be ignored safely.
Bye, Frank