On Wed, 11 Jan 2006, wayne wrote:
In <17349(_dot_)28111(_dot_)486409(_dot_)358726(_at_)saint(_dot_)heaven(_dot_)net> "Dick
St.Peters" <stpeters(_at_)NetHeaven(_dot_)com> writes:
Speaking for myself, it's a matter of interpretation. As I see it,
the SPF draft defines two scopes, an mfrom scope and a helo scope and
says to switch to the helo scope if the mfrom is empty.
Are you saying that you think the SenderID folks changed their concept
of the mfrom scope between their MARID drafts and their current
drafts?
I think some people get confused by reading their drafts and how
they reference SPF draft and assue that MFROM is same as SPF1 but
without allowing to use data for PRA checking. In reality there
are some differences which you pointed out already.
Ultimately this is all result of the confusion between experiments
(which IETF was pressured to say is tolerable) brought out on-purpose
by SID folks as part of EEE strategy.
--
William Leibzon
Elan Networks
william(_at_)elan(_dot_)net
-------
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