Re: [spfbis] #43: New requirement for mx: or ptr records
"Murray S. Kucherawy" <superuser@gmail.com> Thu, 30 August 2012 13:29 UTC
Return-Path: <superuser@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: spfbis@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: spfbis@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2B44121F8616 for <spfbis@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 30 Aug 2012 06:29:13 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.631
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.631 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.032, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id DiyBwbFIqYge for <spfbis@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 30 Aug 2012 06:29:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-lb0-f172.google.com (mail-lb0-f172.google.com [209.85.217.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 552E221F85F4 for <spfbis@ietf.org>; Thu, 30 Aug 2012 06:29:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by lbky2 with SMTP id y2so610079lbk.31 for <spfbis@ietf.org>; Thu, 30 Aug 2012 06:29:11 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=wqOVrLINQjShAnqtCYrHyqUF35SFDJ4AmD8R9l+L9to=; b=LeNdNfCs4VhTP8me/nql3FlwmF24fy4u6GGYP5dM44vz7Y6V4iPRumSTkLGJ2LvMBr nQ9hD+/J1xgVi/bbBSuqtHL0yy8qLedadWDggjARmw15MUN/jWgisYq2BXT+ANsHUmGa U9hqrfNafrQ0NleSnUMrlsstjmSt/Z9x9b3dV6hYVfXbl4LcTb0aUkutMCZxgfFn1Xrb FZR22jOAsegrdfT+wl8flb8v/ub+KWWu+ZXsr1n0xW3h3SPRWGdT/yzRAfeYFcFrJUjz xengtkWi4luZn6ZQ8SWZfT3AJSWgw4LrC7fZDv62l5k5XVzzxMlV5qSaz+MOmu62BJvv noJg==
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.112.9.133 with SMTP id z5mr1373532lba.69.1346333351201; Thu, 30 Aug 2012 06:29:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.112.9.72 with HTTP; Thu, 30 Aug 2012 06:29:11 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <6.2.5.6.2.20120829231332.0a3c4258@elandnews.com>
References: <064.d1bab9aeb936b01c76e6fcdd6a048370@tools.ietf.org> <6.2.5.6.2.20120829231332.0a3c4258@elandnews.com>
Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2012 06:29:11 -0700
Message-ID: <CAL0qLwYPwnQaqd8whLVjeLCAWG_+SOZrB+9QkHzDXeWkCHMcAg@mail.gmail.com>
From: "Murray S. Kucherawy" <superuser@gmail.com>
To: S Moonesamy <sm+ietf@elandsys.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Cc: spfbis@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [spfbis] #43: New requirement for mx: or ptr records
X-BeenThere: spfbis@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: SPFbis discussion list <spfbis.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/spfbis>, <mailto:spfbis-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/spfbis>
List-Post: <mailto:spfbis@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:spfbis-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spfbis>, <mailto:spfbis-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2012 13:29:13 -0000
On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 11:19 PM, S Moonesamy <sm+ietf@elandsys.com> wrote: > One of the RFC 2119 requirements appears in different sections of the draft. > It's better not to restate normative text as it can lead to different > interpretations in case of ambiguity. This is something the RFC Editor will catch and send back as well. It's best to state the normative stuff once and then reference it elsewhere rather than repeating it. (Also of interest: The RFC Editor will not allow document Y to use normative language to summarize other normative language in document X (and rightly so). I discovered this during the final work on the experiment document.) -MSK
- Re: [spfbis] #43: New requirement for mx: or ptr … S Moonesamy
- Re: [spfbis] #43: New requirement for mx: or ptr … Murray S. Kucherawy
- Re: [spfbis] #43: New requirement for mx: or ptr … Scott Kitterman