spf-discuss
[Top] [All Lists]

RE: Re: numeric MX record and SPF

2004-12-14 05:51:11
-----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 
Stephane Bortzmeyer
Sent: dinsdag 14 december 2004 13:31
To: spf-discuss(_at_)v2(_dot_)listbox(_dot_)com
Subject: [spf-discuss] Re: numeric MX record and SPF

On Tue, Dec 14, 2004 at 11:31:29AM +0000,
 Mark <admin(_at_)asarian-host(_dot_)net> wrote 
 a message of 63 lines which said:

SPF should not do a lookup on "61.16.173.99" and then return
NXDOMAIN, but should simply not do a lookup on it at all (treat as
if absent from the list).

This means that SPF implementations would have to:

hints_numeric.ai_flags = AI_NUMERICHOST;
error = getaddrinfo (server, port_name, &hints_numeric, &res);

to test if the "name" is actually an IP address? Bad idea, IMHO. SPF
implementations should treat that MX as any other and then return
ERROR (it is an error to have a name which does not resolve on the RHS
of a MX).

I can see the overhead. Would you return NXDOMAIN, though?

- Mark 
 
        System Administrator Asarian-host.org
 
---
"If you were supposed to understand it,
we wouldn't call it code." - FedEx