spf-discuss
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Re: Draft IETF appeal

2005-08-23 08:57:20
In <430A7158(_dot_)6D76(_at_)xyzzy(_dot_)claranet(_dot_)de> Frank Ellermann 
<nobody(_at_)xyzzy(_dot_)claranet(_dot_)de> writes:

Mark Shewmaker wrote:

I was under the impression that the spf2.0/mfrom and v=spf1
syntaxes weren't precisely compatible.  I don't remember the
details off the top of my head

A minor theoretical difference, spf2.0 kept the positional
modifiers, v=spf1 doesn't know this feature.  In practice
no spf2.0 positional modifier exists at the moment, so this
point is moot (it's on my wish list for v=spf1.1 ;-)

There used to be more incompatibliites, such the removal of the %{h}
(helo identity) macro-variable.  There still are some incompatiblites
because the meanings of "PASS", "FAIL", etc. are redefined in
senderid-core.


-wayne