-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Matthew(_dot_)van(_dot_)Eerde(_at_)hbinc(_dot_)com wrote:
Minor oopsie:
http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc4408.txt
"aParticipants publishing SPF experiment DNS records should consider"
That's in the IESG note section, over which we had no control anyway.
I also see they included the one Sender-ID-only note (about the "Resent-*
header fields") in the SPF RFC. At first, I thought, "how stupid!", but
then I recognized that note might actually serve to invite people to trust
the SPF spec when it says that "checking other [non-envelope] identities
against SPF version 1 records is NOT RECOMMENDED because there are cases
that are known to give incorrect results".
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFEUz9QwL7PKlBZWjsRAjpZAKDDSBQyGYke0XeQjlWS5lD1B8BIPQCcDTeU
HrTPfsV0NVAJP4yZMmwbKSg=
=HK33
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-------
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