Wayne wrote:
I guess I could try and clean up the mess. But, before I spend the
time, I need to know:
1) is backwards compatiblity with spf-draft-200406 important? (That
is basically what I've done.)
Not for me.
2) Should we just make certain characters illegal?
No.
3) Should we try to create an escape mechanism?
I would use a syntax similar to that of the Content-Type header (section 5.1
of RFC 2045). That means also to write the ";" before the key-value-pair.
Note that the ABNF in RFC 2045 does mention the spaces, but obviously they
are allowed.
Comments should be allowed anywhere where a space is allowed.
My suggestion:
header = "Received-SPF:" [CFWS] result *( ";" [CFWS] key-value-pair )
result = "Pass" / "Fail" / "TempError" / "SoftFail" / "Neutral"
/ "None" / "PermError"
key-value-pair = token "=" [CFWS] ( token / quoted-string )
token = 1*( ALPHA / DIGIT / '-' )
quoted-string = ;see RFC 2822
CFWS = <comment or folding white space> ;see RFC 2822
Roger
Roger