spf-discuss
[Top] [All Lists]

[spf-discuss] Re: Another test case for the test suite...

2007-01-13 16:40:20
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Frank Ellermann wrote:
[...]
Yes, but "v=spf1 +a/24 +mx/24 ?all" used to be a "best guess policy",
it's not too bad:  MTAs trying "call back verification" (CBV) query the
MX (or the IP if there's no MX) anyway.

I've always thought that best-guess was a horrendous idea.  It pretends 
authorization where there is none.  And if you dare to apply reputation to 
such a fake "Pass", it becomes a true collateral damage nightmare.

op= is for anything "yes/no" "0/1" "true/false", the least verbose way to
arrange such "properties" like "testing".  Of course "options=" or
"flags=" or a similar name introducing such lists would be more obvious,
but also longer.  The op= is a shorthand for optional.properties=.  I
don't see an advantage for "testing=true helo=never" in comparison with a
combined list "op=testing.nohelo".  op= is shorter, admittedly it's not
nicer.

Sometimes shorter is also nicer. :-)

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFFqW1LwL7PKlBZWjsRAi0lAJ4zF33cKNsm3DBKJklSYeCOiT0Z2QCeIjyG
kCUb1LlVm6Rs32qt7TObVoA=
=oi7G
-----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/?list_id=735

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>