alex at vandenbogaerdt
Sep 2, 2011, 8:14 PM
Post #10 of 13
(1986 views)
Permalink
|
> RFC4408 is fine as it is in a pure sense, but nowhere does it explicitly
> answer the question "What do I do if there's a bogus mechanism in here but
> the record otherwise looks correct?" It's vaguely in there. I think it
> should be explicitly in there.
>
> Yes, it's in the ABNF, and the definition of "permerror" basically covers
> it.
>
> Is there harm in explicitly connecting the two?
Is "xyzzy" an unknown mechanism, a bogus mechanism, or just a syntax error?
To answer this question myself: "Terms that do not contain any of "=",
":", or "/" are mechanisms, as defined in Section 5."
Nowhere in section 5 it says that character strings without "=", ":", or
"/" are mechanisms per se, so this sentence should be read similar to:
"when you encounter a string without "=", ":", or "/", it should be a
mechanism which is defined in section 5."
Chances are that it should have been a mechanism, or a modifier, and it
just contains a typo. Is "xyzzy = blah" intended as mechanism or as
modifier? In any case it is a syntax error, and syntax errors are covered
in the spec, in more than one place, at least in 2.5.7 and 4.6, possibly
more.
Why specifically mention
syntax-errors-which-look-like-mechanisms-but-are-not ?
-------------------------------------------
Sender Policy Framework: http://www.openspf.org [http://www.openspf.org]
Modify Your Subscription: http://www.listbox.com/member/ [http://www.listbox.com/member/]
Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/735/=now
RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/735/1311532-17d8a1ba
Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=1311532&id_secret=1311532-f2ea6ed9
Unsubscribe Now: https://www.listbox.com/unsubscribe/?member_id=1311532&id_secret=1311532-bdbb122a&post_id=20110902231511:EB8A9E1C-D5DA-11E0-8778-EE9D915C2FF1
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
|
