stuart at bmsi
Dec 6, 2007, 11:00 AM
Post #1 of 1
(526 views)
Permalink
|
|
Re: [spf-discuss] Re: Upcoming new test-suite release -- please review! (was: SPF Implementation issues)
|
|
On Thu, 6 Dec 2007, Stuart D. Gathman wrote:
> On Thu, 6 Dec 2007, Stuart D. Gathman wrote:
>
> > + e5a.example.com:
> > + - SPF: v=spf1 a:museum
> >
> > This seems to be not redundant. However, it seems unintuitive to me that
> > example..com must be ignored, but museum gets a permerr.
>
> How about this case:
>
> Result: pass ?
>
> e5b.example.com:
> - SPF: v=spf1 a:museum.
Forgot A record:
museum:
- A:1.2.3.4
But without A record, should it get neutral instead of permerror?
--
Stuart D. Gathman <stuart[at]bmsi.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
Archives: http://v2.listbox.com/member/archive/1007/=now
RSS Feed: http://v2.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/1007/
Modify Your Subscription: http://v2.listbox.com/member/?member_id=1311533&id_secret=73271728-839e36
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
|
