In light of the discussion on spf-discuss, I am convinced that type99
checking on pyspf should be optional. Should probably always do it in
"harsh" mode, but should default to *not* check otherwise, with a flag
to turn it on for those of use who are getting the infrstructure ready
to use it for v=spf3. (Or maybe default to check, with a flag to
omit the almost entirely redundant type99 queries for efficiency.)
Comments? BTW, currently pyspf only checks type99 in harsh mode or when
TXT return no SPF records. So the cost is paid only for domains with no
SPF.
--
Stuart D. Gathman <stuart@bmsi.com>
Business Management Systems Inc. Phone: 703 591-0911 Fax: 703 591-6154
"Confutatis maledictis, flammis acribus addictis" - background song for
a Microsoft sponsored "Where do you want to go from here?" commercial.
-------
To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your subscription,
please go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/?list_id=1007
checking on pyspf should be optional. Should probably always do it in
"harsh" mode, but should default to *not* check otherwise, with a flag
to turn it on for those of use who are getting the infrstructure ready
to use it for v=spf3. (Or maybe default to check, with a flag to
omit the almost entirely redundant type99 queries for efficiency.)
Comments? BTW, currently pyspf only checks type99 in harsh mode or when
TXT return no SPF records. So the cost is paid only for domains with no
SPF.
--
Stuart D. Gathman <stuart@bmsi.com>
Business Management Systems Inc. Phone: 703 591-0911 Fax: 703 591-6154
"Confutatis maledictis, flammis acribus addictis" - background song for
a Microsoft sponsored "Where do you want to go from here?" commercial.
-------
To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your subscription,
please go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/?list_id=1007