Stuart D. Gathman wrote:
TXT only is only the first column, SPF only is only the first
row. The rest of my 3*3 table (four cells) is only for BOTH.
Your table enumerates cases of DNS state. I'm talking about
implementation choices. RFC 4408 gives you 3.
Yes. My 3*3 table is for BOTH. A TXT only implementation would
only see what's in the first column, and SPF only would only see
what's in the first row. And of course my first column and my
first row are identical: NONE (no v=spf1) + NONE (no record) +
TempError (timeout or error).
However the 2nd / 3rd row / column are not identical (which might
be wrong, but it's an interesting test case for implementations
doing BOTH), because "no SPF record + TXT error" might be not the
same as "no TXT record + SPF error".
Because you said here months ago that "SPF error" can be caused
by braindead servers, while "no SPF record" can be a harmless
case of "TXT policy published before type=99 was introduced".
You probably won't like to annoy publishers forced to use such
braindead servers with TempErrors, but if there server is okay
(no SPF record) you'd report issues with their TXT record as a
TempError. Or maybe that's not how you implemented it, but the
"correct" way isn't obvious for me, therefore having it in the
test suite is good.
You said it's already there => ready. Probably I misunderstood
the subject of this thread, don't worry, shit happens... :-)
And if you see "no v=spf1" (no matter on which side, TXT or SPF),
then you'd be sure (?) that the result is NONE if the other side
results in a timeout or error, because it makes no sense to have
good TXT (or SPF) records without v=spf1, plus an SPF (or TXT)
with v=spf1. If both RRs exist and work, they either both have
v=spf1, or they both don't have it.
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/?list_id=735