[spf-discuss] Re: SPFv2.1: whether, why, and what?

Alex van den Bogaerdt wrote:

> Let's agree to disagree.  I see no point in discussing this
> further.
+1  The PermError concept for include: and redirect= is fine,
and any other idea was proven to be FUBAR many times.  For a
completely new SPF version with Julian's "!" idea it could
be different.  But I don't believe in a completely new SPF v3
replacing v=spf1.  A completely new SPF selector v=spf3 doing
something else wrt PGP (example) is another story.  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