Julian Mehnle wrote:
SPF is not strictly backwards-compatible in this case.
However, their behavior is really brain-dead
All I found about this case of "receiver policy" is that:
| RFC1123 SUPPORT SERVICES -- DOMAINS October 1989
|
| 6.1.3.5 Extensibility
|
| DNS software MUST support all well-known, class-independent
| formats [DNS:2], and SHOULD be written to minimize the
| trauma associated with the introduction of new well-known
| types and local experimentation with non-standard types.
[DNS:2] is RFC 1035, its chapter 3.3 is "standard RRs", and
its chapter 3.3.14 is "TXT-RDATA format". Maybe they're free
to ignore queries for TXT, and the receiver is free to handle
that DNS TempError as SMTP TempError.
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