Radu Hociung wrote:
So why not use m=65.0.0.0/6 ?
Tricky. Old implementations ignore new modifiers. And new
implementations are free to ignore them. You could very easily
get it wrong, a sender policy resulting in FAIL with some new
implementations, and other results with other implementations.
Not exactly user-friendly. And looking at the exactly _zero_
feedback I got for the updated "op=" draft I doubt that anybody
is interested in new modifiers. Especially no SPF implementor.
OTOH you're an implementor, you could guarantee that there's at
least one implemetation for your mask-modififier. If you need
an XML template for an indepedent draft use my old "op=" draft,
see draft-spf-6-3-options-04.xml and the corresponding txt in
<http://purl.net/xyzzy/home/test/>
Bye, Frank