-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Alan Maitland wrote:
Actually, I was thinking about this a bit and wonder if the SPF
semantics that Frank Ellermann posed today actually exist in the
specification (IN SPF "v=spf1 op=auth +a ?include:example.com -all").
If such semantics do exist, that is great because then the answer to
your question is perhaps: it is all in how a publisher might publish
their SPF record.
No, "op=auth" (or generally "op=") is not part of the SPFv1 specification,
and we cannot really include it since it is not supported by any SPFv1
implementations out there. Because of this, support for it would have to
be optional in the specification, which would make at least "op=auth" in
particular mostly pointless.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFCoernwL7PKlBZWjsRAn6zAJ4rhjT00RL7UPBVrpc3nWI6UpUazACfeCHG
K2gVul+O2eFxG3nuDm33lzA=
=jq6Y
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----