Re: Re: Broken SPF Records

spf-discuss

Re: Re: Broken SPF Records

2005-07-07 16:59:58

ip4:12.196.50.0/0 is the AFAIK same as ip4:0.0.0.0/0probably not what they wanted, but syntatically okay.
Saying that it's incorrent could make sense, but I'm
not sure how your script decided this.

I am using what is returned using Meng's SPF::Query Module

Thanks
Craig

[More with this subject...]

<Prev in Thread]	Current Thread	[Next in Thread>
Broken SPF Records, Craig Whitmore Re: Broken SPF Records, Craig Whitmore Re: Broken SPF Records, Frank Ellermann Re: Re: Broken SPF Records, Craig Whitmore Re: Broken SPF Records, Frank Ellermann Re: Re: Broken SPF Records, Craig Whitmore <= Re: Re: Broken SPF Records, Stuart D. Gathman nailing down the CIDR length (Was: Broken SPF Records), wayne Re: nailing down the CIDR length, Frank Ellermann Re: Re: nailing down the CIDR length, Commerco WebMaster Re: Re: nailing down the CIDR length, Florian Weimer Re: Re: nailing down the CIDR length, william(at)elan.net Re: Re: nailing down the CIDR length, Florian Weimer Re: nailing down the CIDR length, Frank Ellermann new ABNF for the SPF spec (Was: nailing down the CIDR length), wayne Re: new ABNF for the SPF spec, Frank Ellermann

Previous by Date:	Re: Re: Broken SPF Records, wayne
Next by Date:	Re: SPF Validation Tools - Yet Another One, Frank Ellermann
Previous by Thread:	Re: Broken SPF Records, Frank Ellermann
Next by Thread:	Re: Re: Broken SPF Records, Stuart D. Gathman
Indexes:	[Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists]