In <017801c5aade$1488d2e0$6401a8c0(_at_)hdev1> "Hector Santos"
<spf-discuss(_at_)winserver(_dot_)com> writes:
----- Original Message -----
From: "wayne" <wayne(_at_)schlitt(_dot_)net>
I just spent a little more time on your specs.
Personally, I like the OLD table, your table is confusing.
The old one had a better and clearly approach to describing this
(somewhat illogical) INCLUDE concept.
The old:
included include
query mechanism SPF
result result processing
-------- -- -------------- -------------------------------------
pass => match, return the prefix value for "include"
fail => no match, continue processing
...
The new:
+---------------------------------+---------------------------------+
| A recursive check_host() result | Causes the "include" mechanism |
| of: | to: |
+---------------------------------+---------------------------------+
| Pass | match |
| | |
| Fail | not match |
...
Ok, personally I like the old one better. This table was changed
during MARID, I don't know why. I suspect that it was thought that
the column titles were not clear enough on the old table. It is also
possible that the change had to do with the conversion from a flat
ascii file to XML-based formatting.
No one has complained or commented on this table before now, so I left
it as is.
So, is this something that really should be changed during the AUTH48?
Anyway, thanks Wayne for all your hard work and dedication for SPF.
I really appreciate all your hard work and dedication too.
-wayne
-------
Sender Policy Framework: http://spf.pobox.com/
Archives at http://archives.listbox.com/spf-discuss/current/
To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your
subscription,
please go to
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=spf-discuss(_at_)v2(_dot_)listbox(_dot_)com