Re: Re: Problems with spf testsuite and dns specification

On Sunday 17 June 2007 04:18, Julian Mehnle wrote:
> Scott Kitterman wrote:
> > On Saturday 16 June 2007 17:23, Stuart D. Gathman wrote:
> > > The point is, a live resolver *just might* return multiple identical
> > > records.  In that case (as unlikely as it may be in practice), rfc4408
> > > says the result is PermError.  So this is a legitimate thing to test
> > > for.  The more unlikely, the more important to test for it.
> >
> > I think this is being pedantic beyond all logic.  If someone want to do
> > an errata to say multiple <b> non-identical </b> records, I'm all for
> > it.  There can be no harm in multiple records that are identical, it
> > generates no ambiguity.
>
> This _might_ have been the best resolution 2-3 years ago.  However, now we
> cannot do that anymore, as it would require implementations to check for
> whether multiple records are identical or not.  And grafting this onto RFC
> 4408 with a "SHOULD" (i.e. not strictly requiring the new behavior)
> wouldn't solve the problem at hand.
>
OK.  How about MUST Permerror on multiple SPF records, except implementations 
MAY treat multiple identical records as a single record?

Scott K

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