spf-discuss
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Updating SPF type99 and TXT RR's: Simultaneity is not guaranteed.

2005-08-11 07:28:27
* Scott Kitterman:

One other consideration is that while the spec says that TXT and SPF
must be identical, receivers are explicitly NOT required to check
for this (and in fact, as I think you are arguing it would be a bad
idea).

One of us is misreading the spec, it seems.  (It could well be me.)

Here's the relevant paragraph, I think:

| 4.5.  Selecting Records
| 
|    Records begin with a version section:
| 
|    record           = version terms *SP
|    version          = "v=spf1"
| 
|    Starting with the set of records that were returned by the lookup,
|    record selection proceeds in three steps:
| 
|    1.  Records that do not begin with a version section of exactly
|        "v=spf1" are discarded.  Note that the version section is
|        terminated either by a SP character or the end of the record.  A
|        record with a version section of "v=spf10" does not match and
|        must be discarded.
| 
|    2.  If there are both SPF and TXT records in the set and if they are
|        not all identical, return a "PermError".
| 
|    3.  If any records of type SPF are in the set, then all records of
|        type TXT are discarded.

I *think* that this requires SPF clients to signal PermError in case
of a mismatch.


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