Re: "Last Call" pending exp= (empty) erratum
Julian Mehnle <[email protected]> Tue, 27 Nov 2007 15:49:26 +0000
| Newsgroups | gmane.mail.spam.spf.devel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Frank Ellermann wrote:
> Julian Mehnle wrote:
> > %{h} can never yield an empty <target-name>.
>
> If there's no HELO / EHLO at all, or just the verb without a name, then
> %{h} would be empty / undefined. That's an SMTP syntax error, but
> receivers could nevertheless decide to talk to the client.
>
> Likely there are more plausible examples how <target-name> could
> end up "empty" or otherwise unusable.
> [...]
OK, but then it's not our problem how implementations deal with it.
Unspecified input -> unspecified output.
> > RFC 4408 implies a result of "Fail" for the above example of yours,
> > and this is what Mail::SPF does.
>
> Okay, toss a coin between option 2 and 3 for this erratum ? Or we
> could use Ned's trick, your proposal (option 2) is shorter, and if in
> doubt shorter wins. (Disclaimer, Ned uses that for spelling issues ;-)
I vote for option 2.
Note however that the change inherent to option 2 only covers the "v=spf1
exp=" class of cases, not the "v=spf1 exp=%{macro-expression}" (with the
macro expression evaluating to the empty string) class of cases. The
latter is not a syntax error, but is to be considered a DNS processing
error, which is already covered by RFC 4408 as is.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFHTDyGwL7PKlBZWjsRAlOfAJ9iilTkHhrlc6ce+pudmfyH0TfyzQCg+NrJ
SVW6IjgL6l9Daz7k1sGnNTQ=
=SqAf
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your
subscription,
please go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/?member_id=6959932&id_secret=69040118-1b317f
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com