In <NGBBLEIJOEEEBMEIAPBKGEGIIJAA(_dot_)scott(_at_)kitterman(_dot_)com> Scott
Kitterman <spf2(_at_)kitterman(_dot_)com> writes:
I think that's Wayne's post clears it up. I had it wrong and will propose a
small clarifying patch for the spec. I wish it were the other way around,
but I gather it's not.
I wish a lot of things were different in SPF.
Thanks for bringing these kinds of issues up and thanks for working on
an SPF validator. It is best that these warts are well known.
Oh, as far as silent errors go, don't forget things like
"v=spf1 a redire=foo.com", "v=spf a mx -all", "v=spf1 a:%{i} -all",
and probably a half dozen other things that are syntaxtically valid,
but practically useless.
I view a lot of these things as being similar to computer programs
that, while they compile fine, have things that will generate warnings
if the proper flags are used. A good SPF validator should check for
all sorts of things that are technically legal, but questionable in
practice.
-wayne