wayne wrote:
I would say "yes". Section 4.5 doesn't say "equivalent", it
says "identical".
Fix it somehow, it's some RfC 3597 oddity. Maybe add "(case
insensitively)" to "identical". Don't try "equivalent", it's
okay to sort adjacent directives with the same result in any
way, or to move modifiers around (only in v=spf1, not spf2.0).
/me hates the SPF RR type.
It will be the only decent way to "opt-out" from the buggy PRA
if the appeals don't work.
Bye, Frank