spf-discuss
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Results from the SPF council review on I-D issues.

2005-05-21 00:43:40
"Mark" responded:

-----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 Chris 
Haynes
Sent: vrijdag 20 mei 2005 19:22
To: spf-discuss(_at_)v2(_dot_)listbox(_dot_)com
Subject: Re: [spf-discuss] Results from the SPF council
review on I-D issues.


 "wayne"asked:.

> The suggested names that I have heard are:
>
>  * sign
>
>  * mode
>
>  * indicator
>
>  * action
>
>  * result
>
>  * match-result
>

 I _do_ feel a change to a functional name is valuable.
I vote for 'action' or 'result'.

The only really proper term, IMHO, is "qualifier".

The rest is just slightly off. "pass" and "fail", etc, these are
themselves results, so it cannot be 'result'. Nor are they an 'action'
really (though they prompt to action). 'sign' is also a bit crooked, as
usually only + and - are associated with 'sign' (don't beat me up over
this one; I am not a mathematician). Nor is it really itself a 'mode' (of
operation; though, like above, it suggests one). 'indicator' is, in turn,
too barren, so to speak, as it lacks the suggestion for action.

Therefore, I believe "qualifier" has it all: it qualifies the result (it
'indicates' a result + suggests 'action').

I am not horribly hung up on the matter, btw, as this is a relative
trivial issue.



Actually, to me this is not trivial, not if we want things to be clear for new adopters.

When I first came across SPF this notation really puzzled me. It took me several readings to realize that these single characters, which looked like they were minor operational prefixes or syntactic qualifiers, where actually _the result_ of a match to the mechanism they preceed. It was especially wierd because it is unusual to have the result as the first part of a syntactic group - normally the consequence is to the right of the cause (in LTR languages). That's why I think it is valuable to pick some word that makes their semantic significance clear.

Something like '-a' _means_ if the IP address matches the 'a' mechanism the _result_ of the attempt to determine the sender's SPF policy for this IP is 'FAIL'.

One could argue (as I am now doing) that the symbol represents the sender's _policy_ for any IP that matches the related mechanism. That really makes its semantic significance clear.


So, I hereby amend my vote to 'policy' or 'result'.

Chris Haynes