Julian Mehnle wrote:
~~~ new ~~~
explanation = "exp" "=" [ domain-spec ]
~~~ end ~~~
Ugly like hell. Maybe it's better to fix the prose so that it
matches the existing syntax (?)
Right. Why should the grammar allow an argument-less and completely
nonsensical "exp=" when it enforces even the correct numerical range
for IP address octets?
Guessing, I think what the prose really wants is that an empty target-
name (after the macro expansion of <domain-spec>) is ignored. It's
more important to reject the FAIL than to deal with any exp= issues.
Maybe s/<domain-spec>/<target-name>/ in 6.2 is a fix for this erratum.
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