IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

Alessandro Vesely <vesely@tana.it> Mon, 22 April 2013 15:48 UTC

Return-Path: <vesely@tana.it>
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 0D5F221F911E for <spfbis@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 22 Apr 2013 08:48:36 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.719
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.719 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_IT=0.635, HOST_EQ_IT=1.245, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id j3wPht8HwPUa for <spfbis@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 22 Apr 2013 08:48:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from wmail.tana.it (www.tana.it [62.94.243.226]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC6E221F9128 for <spfbis@ietf.org>; Mon, 22 Apr 2013 08:48:34 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=tana.it; s=beta; t=1366645713; bh=dj5cNgtbh0MZFgdQ0xs5WNwR2BA2fCqCquKMkvEEznI=; l=974; h=Date:From:To:References:In-Reply-To; b=WiFYZTqXz/nfOjXssF7tRtc5fI6w0ZxYh+WB2Obe6vRdq9YTjc4YNFzGWmfjbngah LXDNABHO2fnwmx1dVCnwBbo7FwVDpreH2m6XCIq5mXcfnStc9FKU8E+Fl8RS2mm4Fe oXrm6gGcWs6Z7J/6A19eUYZaGi2hv3E4hfMSCIAI=
Authentication-Results: tana.it; auth=pass (details omitted)
Received: from [172.25.197.101] (pcale.tana [172.25.197.101]) (AUTH: CRAM-MD5 uXDGrn@SYT0/k) by wmail.tana.it with ESMTPA; Mon, 22 Apr 2013 17:48:33 +0200 id 00000000005DC039.0000000051755BD1.000004CC
Message-ID: <51755BD1.5080106@tana.it>
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2013 17:48:33 +0200
From: Alessandro Vesely <vesely@tana.it>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130328 Thunderbird/17.0.5
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: spfbis@ietf.org
References: <20130409062431.GK24624@mx1.yitter.info> <6.2.5.6.2.20130416214029.0c16f0b8@resistor.net> <517490A6.5020502@gathman.org> <17085583.vi2SDUBAix@scott-latitude-e6320>
In-Reply-To: <17085583.vi2SDUBAix@scott-latitude-e6320>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [spfbis] WGLC: draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-14 - Fully parse record *first*
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: Mon, 22 Apr 2013 15:48:36 -0000

On Mon 22/Apr/2013 16:04:11 +0200 Scott Kitterman wrote:
> 
> If I take your view that it's better to raise the error (unknown mechanism), 
> the perhaps changing the 5.1 language would help.  Adding the sentence before 
> in, for more context:
> 
>> 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

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email