Frank Ellermann wrote:
I'm too lazy to dig in the list archive today. Is that all a
hallucination on my side, RFC 4408 always wanted PermError for
adjacent dots ? In that case I could mark the wannabe-erratum
as bogey stating that 4.4 is limited to the cases not already
covered by 2.5.7.
That would make sense if the explanation about DNS timeout were coded
in section 2.5.6. Besides 4.4, section 5 also repeats that same
concept. As a matter of taste, I think the specifications would be
more readable if the discussion on DNS RCODEs were concentrated in a
single section. (This has probably been discussed already as well.)
I hope marking errata is a prelude to preparing a new version of the
specifications...
-------------------------------------------
Sender Policy Framework: http://www.openspf.org
Archives: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/735/=now
RSS Feed: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/735/
Modify Your Subscription:
http://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=2183229&id_secret=95887956-51703a
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com