spf-discuss
[Top] [All Lists]

RE: Re: 63/64 and two minor -01 problems

2005-05-24 13:53:00
-----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 wayne
Sent: Tuesday, May 24, 2005 4:48 PM
To: spf-discuss(_at_)v2(_dot_)listbox(_dot_)com
Subject: Re: [spf-discuss] Re: 63/64 and two minor -01 problems


In <42932C36(_dot_)47AA(_at_)xyzzy(_dot_)claranet(_dot_)de> Frank Ellermann
<nobody(_at_)xyzzy(_dot_)claranet(_dot_)de> writes:

wayne wrote:

I didn't like RFC821, since it will be obsoletedby RFC2821
Real Soon Now.

"Real Soon Now" is some grumpy joke, right ?

Yeah, although many other people use it.  "Any Minute Now" is for
things that should happen within a year or so.  ;-)


please remove '"exp" counted' in 10.1 - throwing a PermError
after the result is clear is rubbish)

If I recall correctly, this was discussed and people really
wanted exp= to be counted.

Yes, it was discussed, but TTBOMK people agreed that when a
client already has a solid FAIL it makes no sense to "reduce"
this to a PermError only because of one additional exp= query.

Ok, I tried looking into this some, but couldn't find the
discussions.  I am very reluctant to re-open old issues.

Although I haven't had time to search the archives, my recollection
parallels Frank's

Scott K


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