On Wed, 23 May 2007, Stuart D. Gathman wrote:
On Wed, 23 May 2007, Scott Kitterman wrote:
I like option 2 because I don't like the idea that messing up the
explanation
causes SPF errors. The exp modifier is about why something happened and
shouldn't change what happens.
I think you meant option 1.
I think they could be reworded as follows:
Option 1 never gives permerror for empty exp.
Option 2 gives permerror for both implicit and explicit empty exp
Option 3 gives permerror for explicit empty exp ("exp="), but not
for implicit empty exp (as a result of macro expansion, e.g. "exp=%h")
I favor option 1, for the same reason as Scott. I could live with Option 3:
"Ok, someone clearly screwed up with an explicit exp=, but don't let screwy
HELO
cause an SPF permerror on an otherwise syntactically valid record."
+1 I prefer option 1
--
Boyd Gerber <gerberb(_at_)zenez(_dot_)com>
ZENEZ 1042 East Fort Union #135, Midvale Utah 84047
-------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
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
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com