Re: Re: Problems with spf testsuite and dns specification

"Stuart D. Gathman" <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.mail.spam.spf.devel
Message-ID <[email protected]>
On Sun, 17 Jun 2007, Stefano Bagnara wrote:

> It is not about test setups. Please try to understand that you can
> publish multiple identical records but you can't really predict what the
> SPF clients will receive. This is IMO really bad as the SPF spec
> currently require different behavior given the resolvers/caches in the
> transport layer.

You are absolutely correct.  The 4408 mandated behaviour is essentially
impossible to test for with live DNS, and produces inconsistent results
depending on cache/resolver behaviour.  This needs to be
fixed for v=spf3.  We can't change 4408 and suddenly require implementations to
combine identical records.  So the only reasonable course seems to be to allow
both results in the test suite - reflecting the inconsistent results seen in
the real worlds.  It really isn't *that* bad a situation.  Publishers
with multiple identical records *deserve* screwy results.

> > Now if you feel that RFC 4408 didn't really mean to mandate a permerror
> > for multiple records when they are identical (in light of 2181), then we can
> > discuss that.  We can also allow both results in the test suite to reflect
> > that lack of consensus.
> 
> +1

+1 	(I can vote for my own proposal?)

-- 
	      Stuart D. Gathman <[email protected]>
    Business Management Systems Inc.  Phone: 703 591-0911 Fax: 703 591-6154
"Confutatis maledictis, flammis acribus addictis" - background song for
a Microsoft sponsored "Where do you want to go from here?" commercial.

-------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
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
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.