Re: [spfbis] WGLC: draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-14 - Fully parse record *first*

[Scott Kitterman <[e-mail]>]

On Monday, April 22, 2013 06:37:56 PM Alessandro Vesely wrote:
> On Mon 22/Apr/2013 18:06:41 +0200 Scott Kitterman wrote:
> > On Monday, April 22, 2013 05:48:33 PM Alessandro Vesely wrote:
> >> On Mon 22/Apr/2013 16:04:11 +0200 Scott Kitterman wrote:
> >>>> Mechanisms after "all" will never be tested.  Mechanisms listed after
> >>>> "all"
> >>>> MUST be ignored.
> >>> 
> >>> Perhaps if we combine those it helps:
> >>>> Mechanisms after "all" MUST not be tested.  Mechanisms listed after
> >>>> "all"
> >>>> will be ignored for all purposes except syntax error evaluation.
> >>> 
> >>> Does that help?
> >> 
> >> Nope, IMHO it's better as is now.  That is:
> >> 
> >> CURRENT
> >> 
> >>    If there are any syntax errors
> >> 
> >> EQUIVALENT-FROM-A-PRAGMATIC-POV
> >> 
> >>    If any syntax errors are found
> >>    
> >>    anywhere in the record, check_host() returns immediately with the
> >>    result "permerror", without further interpretation.
> >> 
> >> See also http://tools.ietf.org/wg/spfbis/trac/ticket/26
> >> and http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/spfbis/current/msg02765.html
> > 
> > Right, but how can you find a syntax error in something you MUST ignore?
> 
> You have to parse it anyway, as it might be a modifier, e.g.
> 
>    "v=spf1 a -all ra=rfc6652"

That's true, but as soon as I determine it's a mechanism, I ignore it, so the 
ambiguity still exists.

Scott K