wayne wrote:
I don't see any reason to tell implementations how to do
their job.
+1
We just had a mini-thread Re: aaaa again, and I was confident
to say "no problem in the spec., maybe their implementation
is broken". And Stuart identified an interesting test case
for pyspf, the "take AAAA instead of A for IPv6" rule is also
relevant for the mx mechanism.
Changing something that's correct to something that might be
"nice to have", but where I'm not more sure that the concept
is still clear for readers is risky.
This may be a good way of doing things, but I see no reason
that should be in the draft. It is already too long.
ACK. Not excessively too long, it's nice to have some obvious
traps and pitfalls directly in the SPF spec. for reference in
discussions with smart folks who don't like SPF.
Bye, Frank
-------
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