On 05/18/2006 19:00, Alex van den Bogaerdt wrote:
On Thu, May 18, 2006 at 03:53:40PM -0700,
Matthew(_dot_)van(_dot_)Eerde(_at_)hbinc(_dot_)com wrote:
Is that ":3600" part really possible? If so, what does it mean?
The :3600 part violates RFC 4408. From the ABNF:
mechanism = ( all / include / A / MX / PTR / IP4 / IP6 / exists )
all = "all"
That's what I thought. So it seems a bug in the spf library exists.
Stuart, can you confirm?
Not Stuart, but I just looked at pySPF and it doesn't check for that. It
needs an update. It needed an update to allow for trailing dots (one of the
AUTH 48 changes) anyway. If I get some time to look at it before Stuart
does, I'll update it.
Scott K
-------
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