-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Koen Martens wrote:
Scott Kitterman wrote:
If he looks at it, he will find that Stuart and I have evolved pySPF
substantailly since his last release. Unless there are some other
bugs, I think that for the functions it implements (pySPF does not
support IPv6) it is almost fully RFC 4408 compliant when run in
'strict' mode.
Is IPv6 planned to be added in the near future? I think it's quite
essential, i regularly get queries (both via ticket system and IRL)
about ipv6 + spf, and have to admit that it is sparsely documented
and supported (eg. in the 'wizard', that awful thing, and in the old
documentation on the old site).
I plan to tackle Mail::SPF (and the test suite, in the process) soon, BTW,
which will support IPv6.
Point of attention I think.
Absolutely agreed.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFEbupXwL7PKlBZWjsRAuwzAKDLEyLpIbXY/kXfdUKTWUBOTclNaQCdERAH
TrPxXciL+sg0qogzrUNu9Z4=
=9lyO
-----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