wayne writes:
According to the spec, it is ok for an SPF implementation to drop
records that require DNS over TCP. This wasn't really a design
choice, but rather it is more of an acknowledgement that there are
firewalls and resolvers out there that can't deal with falling back to
TCP. If the SPF records are dropped, then the include:bigfish.com
mechanism should trigger a PermError.
I can't see any way that this lookup could cause a Fail, *if* the SPF
implementation is following the spec.
Does "the spec" have any real meaning when there's no RFC yet and all
the drafts have expired?
--
Dick St.Peters, stpeters(_at_)NetHeaven(_dot_)com
-------
Sender Policy Framework: http://www.openspf.org/
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