Re: SPF and HELO, was Re: SPF PASS (was: "If you believe that the SPF concept is fundamentally flawed, please subscribe at http://www.imc.org/ietf-mxcomp/")

On Thu, 26 May 2005, wayne wrote:
>
> These I-Ds also call for a new version number to be used, which is good,
> but then these I-Ds say that the new semantics should be applied to
> SPFv1 records, which is REALLY bad.

I strongly agree. This makes it impossible to use SPF's baroqueness to
advantage, e.g. by using BATV with stunt DNS servers, and other clever
tricks.

Tony.
-- 
f.a.n.finch  <[email protected]>  http://dotat.at/
BISCAY: WEST 5 OR 6 BECOMING VARIABLE 3 OR 4. SHOWERS AT FIRST. MODERATE OR
GOOD.