Re: Re: Problems with spf testsuite and dns specification

Julian Mehnle ha scritto:
> 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?

I agree, but

I also think that if you don't want to change the specification about
multiple identical records then the current failing tests should be kept
and both results should be accepted (the PermError and the real result
of the single spf record, that I didn't test if it is Pass or what
else). This way in that test comment we will record this issue.

Stefano

PS: I still think that it would be better to change the spf spec so that
multiple identical records are considered a single record by spf, but I
can live with the above change.

-------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
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