Re: design specifics --- the config label

Meng Weng Wong <[email protected]> wrote:
> Does anyone have an objection to doing the config label?
> 
> The thing that returns "permit:mx; permit:spf; permit:host=foobar.com;
> permit:cidr=special-list.foobar.com; deny:default".
> 
> If not, shall we use config._smtp_client.DOMAIN label or something else?

  As a start, sure.

> If we're going to do CIDR in TXT, I believe Hadmut has spent the most
> time thinking about those issues.

  The main flaw of RMX is that it returns information about *all* of
the IP's (or at least the last draft had that.)  Most MTA's only care
about one IP: the one connecting to them.  So the protocol should be
lightweight.

> Who has experience doing RFCs?  I believe there's an XML formatting
> scheme but I don't know much more.

  There's xml2rfc, but it's too heavy-weight for now.

> We could start collaboratively editing a document on a Wiki somewhere.

  Sure.  Do you have a URL? 

  Text is fine for a start.  I can then edit & format it into the RFC
standard.

  Alan DeKok.