spf-discuss
[Top] [All Lists]

RE: New SPF RR type and broken DNS servers

2005-08-04 13:28:13
On Thu, 4 Aug 2005, Scott Kitterman wrote:

Strictly speaking, the way I read the current draft, this situation requires
a TempError, except that we know it's not temporary on the timeline of
e-mail message delivery.

Agreed.

I think it's the way to go.  This is probably another case for your relaxed
checking.  Possibly strict and certainly harsh processing should raise a
TempError for this (e.g. TempError - Braindead DNS...)

Except it does not belong in the self.perm_error attribute.  I could
rename to self.error - which would contain the "official" exception
result whether temp or perm, and either would have the "ext" attribute
for extended results.

Or I could make the official exception private, and have a self.extended
attribute for extended results: normally None.

Stupid me for assuming that extended processing would only apply
to perm_error results :-}

-- 
              Stuart D. Gathman <stuart(_at_)bmsi(_dot_)com>
    Business Management Systems Inc.  Phone: 703 591-0911 Fax: 703 591-6154
"Confutatis maledictis, flamis acribus addictis" - background song for
a Microsoft sponsored "Where do you want to go from here?" commercial.


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