-----Original Message-----
From: owner-spf-discuss(_at_)v2(_dot_)listbox(_dot_)com
[mailto:owner-spf-discuss(_at_)v2(_dot_)listbox(_dot_)com]On Behalf Of David
Woodhouse
Sent: Monday, November 29, 2004 4:47 AM
To: spf-discuss(_at_)v2(_dot_)listbox(_dot_)com
Subject: Re: [spf-discuss] Re: URGENT: Community Position on SenderID
On Mon, 2004-11-29 at 10:35 +0100, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
On Thu, Nov 25, 2004 at 10:36:02PM -0000,
Peter Bowyer <peter(_at_)bowyer(_dot_)org> wrote
a message of 28 lines which said:
We should take care to remember this - SPF is only the
framework and
imposes no policy on the MTA owner
I agree and this is why it is very important that the
future RFC does
not mandate a policy (such as saying you SHOULD end the record with
-all).
That's actually a problem. It would be helpful if the spec
would either
say that you SHOULD, or say that you SHOULD NOT. As it is, some people
do it and others don't when they're in fact in precisely the same
situation.
You simply cannot apply a blanket answer to all situations. Some situations
warrant -all, other
situations warrant publishing ?all.
Unless the RFC goes into the very detailed and exhaustive list of situations
that are SHOULD vs
SHOULD NOT, the RFC SHOULD NOT indicate a hard and fast rule for -all.
I think the indications of when to use -all would be best left for a FAQ.
Terry Fielder
Manager Software Development and Deployment
Great Gulf Homes / Ashton Woods Homes
terry(_at_)greatgulfhomes(_dot_)com
Fax: (416) 441-9085
--
dwmw2
-------
Sender Policy Framework: http://spf.pobox.com/
Archives at http://archives.listbox.com/spf-discuss/current/
http://www.InboxEvent.com/?s=d --- Inbox Event Nov 17-19 in
Atlanta features SPF and Sender ID.
To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily
deactivate your subscription,
please go to
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=spf-discuss(_at_)v2(_dot_)listbox(_dot_)com