spf-discuss
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [spf-discuss] INCLUDE Statement

2005-08-27 07:29:05

----- Original Message -----
From: "wayne" <wayne(_at_)schlitt(_dot_)net>

So, is this something that really should be changed
during the AUTH48?

Yes, anything that removes ambiguity and complexity always helps.

Developers need consist language and logic.

These IETF-like documents resemble more like functional specs.  Developers
need "technical specs."  There is a major difference.  You get the basic
idea with the functional specs. You code with the technical specs.  Since
the IETF can't afford to do both what you have is a "bastardized" merger of
the two. :-)

--
Hector Santos, Santronics Software, Inc.
http://www.santronics.com







-------
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