Re: [spfbis] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7208 (4751)

S Moonesamy <> Mon, 31 October 2016 09:13 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2AD9B129585 for <>; Mon, 31 Oct 2016 02:13:58 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.287
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.287 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.497, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (1024-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.b=wjWBzfWI; dkim=fail (1024-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.b=GCl7YSQU
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id RgBkWukeEO8O for <>; Mon, 31 Oct 2016 02:13:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2001:470:f329:1::1]) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 65153129579 for <>; Mon, 31 Oct 2016 02:13:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ([]) (authenticated bits=0) by (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id u9V9DRSV002979 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 31 Oct 2016 02:13:38 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple;; s=mail2010; t=1477905224; x=1477991624; bh=qQqiCedNs38/jyN5owcaafZcZlB+ZLb9MVSmarTbwAQ=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=wjWBzfWIc17BLCouOqTro4Zi/NBAwhpUJTPhxNbGqm+aS/pJ+DXSGGFQtcFY8NFKE MfchX45W2XqhPL/7JtC2cKz9BjultWauIVCX5rvxDEvxwE3z7+iShsC2D3VGqwZIcu sKTZKfTySLshAkxxLPhS/qbyVxhNT6xa3+ThYiFQ=
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple;; s=mail; t=1477905224; x=1477991624;; bh=qQqiCedNs38/jyN5owcaafZcZlB+ZLb9MVSmarTbwAQ=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=GCl7YSQUOjOi0kJslbXRImtahq7g7Gf1Xyw70DhGFDy1PDUudymZzM0bJSMFb4zxq P05jTU3yWlYzyJKFuCLwyNfn0udwMfpEPaLP1QB3C+SR/EKq0+YhoxC2xBuThzehB8 VOaMwByBgrqely1Wpf4XWmYyCN2qzdv7cJmLzBbM=
Message-Id: <>
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version
Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2016 02:12:23 -0700
To: RFC Errata System <>,,,,,
From: S Moonesamy <>
In-Reply-To: <>
References: <>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [spfbis] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC7208 (4751)
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: SPFbis discussion list <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2016 09:13:58 -0000

At 00:04 27-07-2016, RFC Errata System wrote:
>The following errata report has been submitted for RFC7208,
>"Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in 
>Email, Version 1".
>You may review the report below and at:
>Type: Technical
>Reported by: Ken Mortimer <>;
>Section: 5.5
>Original Text
>This mechanism matches if
>o  the <target-name> is a subdomain of a validated domain name, or
>o  the <target-name> and a validated domain name are the same.
>Corrected Text
>This mechanism matches if
>o  a validated domain name is a subdomain of the <target-name>, or
>o  the <target-name> and a validated domain name are the same.
>The first bullet point is in contradiction to the description of the 
>ptr mechanism evaluation in the preceding paragraph:
>"Check all validated domain names to see if they either match the 
><target-name> domain or are a subdomain of the <target-name> domain. 
>If any do, this mechanism matches. If no validated domain name can 
>be found, or if none of the validated domain names match or are a 
>subdomain of the <target-name>, this mechanism fails to match."

I suggest marking this erratum as "verified".

S. Moonesamy