spf-discuss
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: IESG evaluation of SPF

2005-04-06 22:34:36
Mark wrote:

As long as we can all agree on a wording which makes clear
that using "v=spf1" records for anything else than what they
were designed for, is undesireable

Anything below "NOT RECOMMENDED" is unacceptable, as long as
draft-lyon-senderid-core-00 says "SHOULD".  Let _them_ commit
net suicide, don't be so tolerant with this blatant net abuse.

It's not only "undesirable", what's going on here ?  You know
that it _breaks_ perfect sender policies, mailing lists, and
other cases.

| Imperatives of the type defined in this memo must be used
| with care and sparingly.  In particular, they MUST only be
| used where it is actually required for interoperation or to
| limit behavior which has potential for causing harm
  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
| MUST NOT
| This phrase, or the phrase "SHALL NOT", mean that the
| definition is an absolute prohibition of the specification
................^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

There's an absolute guarantee that PRA on v=spf1 causes harm.
It is required for interoperation that receivers evaluate
v=spf1 sender policies as specified or leave them alone.

                          Bye, Frank



<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>