Re: Problems with spf testsuite and dns specification
Julian Mehnle <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.mail.spam.spf.devel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Stuart D. Gathman wrote: > On Tue, 12 Jun 2007, Julian Mehnle wrote: > > Stuart, do you see any reason why having such tests with multiple > > _identical_ -- as opposed to merely multiple, but differing -- SPF > > records is important? > > *Especially* if there is logic invoked only upon duplicates, you want > to check for a correct result. If the spec should not have an errata > for this, then the best resolution is probably to allow both results for > duplicate records. No -- assuming this isn't something the SPF spec should care about, then why is this something the test suite needs to check? Doesn't it suffice to check only the weaker case where multiple but differing records exist? (After all, the case is not weaker from SPF's PoV, only from that of DNS. But we aren't testing the correctness of DNS, just that of SPF.) What does checking the multiple-identical-records case give us that checking the weaker case doesn't? -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFGb6BJwL7PKlBZWjsRAoW7AKCbweImnXKpw/M0wu9z5UW6lBKhZQCgvbBg QkhGtUgRNZXmRbQ6fyCZcqI= =i8hi -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- ------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your subscription, please go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/?member_id=6959932&user_secret=62b4c45f Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com