spf-discuss
[Top] [All Lists]

[spf-discuss] Re: [spf-devel] Last erratum last call (was: Upcoming new test-suite release)

2008-04-06 19:55:53
On Sun, 6 Apr 2008, Frank Ellermann wrote:

PermError => add note that this is about a syntactically invalid
             <target-name> for DNS, for example adjacent dots.

you could still change your mind

Nobody made new noises in this direction, therefore I edited
the "last erratum" to say "no match".  Please check that the
proposed text says what you want:

You had me convinced that PermError was better than nomatch.  Mainly
because literally putting a:example..com is a plausible typo that should
get a PermError, rather than silently failing to match.  You made the
case that no legitimate sender should generate a PermError via macros.
(If the policy wants to accomodate braindead senders, don't use %{h}.)

My only reservation is that spammers could generate PermError via macros.
I was considering posting an auto-note to postmaster in case of PermError
in addition to a DSN, but PermError from macros would discourage that.

-- 
              Stuart D. Gathman <stuart(_at_)bmsi(_dot_)com>
    Business Management Systems Inc.  Phone: 703 591-0911 Fax: 703 591-6154
"Confutatis maledictis, flammis acribus addictis" - background song for
a Microsoft sponsored "Where do you want to go from here?" commercial.

-------------------------------------------
Sender Policy Framework: http://www.openspf.org
Modify Your Subscription: http://www.listbox.com/member/
Archives: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/735/=now
RSS Feed: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/735/
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com

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