Mailing List Archive

RE: Question about spf tests onhttp://www.midwestcs.com/spf/tests/
<<snip>> (No it's not an XML tag)

>The SPEC quite perfectly spanned the entire smegging internet community
and all its platforms without XML thank you.
>I strongly urge you to re-evaluate the SPF syntax and you will find
that not only is it extensible, but its compact,
>it actually IS human readable, AND !! *KEY POINT HERE* !! its safe to
put >into DNS. Why? Because AOL can describe
>their ENTIRE network inside of a SINGLE DNS record. Now thats fucking
impressive. You show me that with your precious
>XML crap and I'll sing Hit me Baby One more Time in a fucking Diaper in
the middle of rush hour with a bumper sticker
>professing my love for XML.

AOL's SPF DNS record:

v=spf1 ip4:152.163.225.0/24 ip4:205.188.139.0/24 ip4:205.188.144.0/24
ip4:205.188.156.0/23 ip4:205.188.159.0/24 ip4:64.12.136.0/23
ip4:64.12.138.0/24 ptr:mx.aol.com ?all

And now as XML:

<spf v="1" ip4="152.163.225.0/24 205.188.139.0/24 205.188.144.0/24
205.188.156.0/23 205.188.159.0/24 64.12.136.0/23 64.12.138.0/24"
ptr="mx.aol.com" all="?" />

Smaller than the SPF record, pushlishes the same data, just as readable
by a human, parseable with a little bit of C AND !! *KEY POINT HERE* !!
loadable by an XML parser if you so want.

Bumper sticker is in the post and I can't wait to see your video
covering the Britney song...

I'm not suggesting that SPF is stored as XML, but please don't insult me
publicly again and not expect me to defend myself.

:-)
-Gary

This message (and any associated files) is intended only for the use of spf-devel@v2.listbox.com and may contain information that is confidential, subject to copyright or constitutes a trade secret. If you are not spf-devel@v2.listbox.com you are hereby notified that any dissemination, copying or distribution of this message, or files associated with this message, is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the message and deleting it from your computer. Messages sent to and from us may be monitored. Any views or opinions presented are solely those of the author gary@exclaimer.net and do not necessarily represent those of the company.

This disclaimer was added by eXclaimer for Microsoft Exchange 2000, a DCSL product. Please visit our web site at www.exclaimer.co.uk for more information.

-------
To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your subscription,
please go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=spf-devel@v2.listbox.com
RE: Question about spf tests onhttp://www.midwestcs.com/spf/tests/ [ In reply to ]
On Fri, 2004-06-11 at 01:43, Gary Levell wrote:
> <<snip>> (No it's not an XML tag)
>
> >The SPEC quite perfectly spanned the entire smegging internet community
> and all its platforms without XML thank you.
> >I strongly urge you to re-evaluate the SPF syntax and you will find
> that not only is it extensible, but its compact,
> >it actually IS human readable, AND !! *KEY POINT HERE* !! its safe to
> put >into DNS. Why? Because AOL can describe
> >their ENTIRE network inside of a SINGLE DNS record. Now thats fucking
> impressive. You show me that with your precious
> >XML crap and I'll sing Hit me Baby One more Time in a fucking Diaper in
> the middle of rush hour with a bumper sticker
> >professing my love for XML.
>
> AOL's SPF DNS record:
>
> v=spf1 ip4:152.163.225.0/24 ip4:205.188.139.0/24 ip4:205.188.144.0/24
> ip4:205.188.156.0/23 ip4:205.188.159.0/24 ip4:64.12.136.0/23
> ip4:64.12.138.0/24 ptr:mx.aol.com ?all
>
> And now as XML:
>
> <spf v="1" ip4="152.163.225.0/24 205.188.139.0/24 205.188.144.0/24
> 205.188.156.0/23 205.188.159.0/24 64.12.136.0/23 64.12.138.0/24"
> ptr="mx.aol.com" all="?" />

Have another look at the draft Gary ;) Perhaps I should have worded my
statement to include the words "valid SPF-CID XML" record.

> Smaller than the SPF record, pushlishes the same data, just as readable
> by a human, parseable with a little bit of C AND !! *KEY POINT HERE* !!
> loadable by an XML parser if you so want.

See above :)

> Bumper sticker is in the post and I can't wait to see your video
> covering the Britney song...

Well I always thought of my self as a good singer... but I don't think
i'll be making any appearances soon.

> I'm not suggesting that SPF is stored as XML, but please don't insult me
> publicly again and not expect me to defend myself.
>
> :-)
> -Gary

I wouldn't have it any other way ;)

If I can dish it out then I can certainly take it back :-), and I'll
still gladly sing that tune in a diaper should you be able to do as
described ;)

Cheers,

James

--
James Couzens,
Programmer
-----------------------------------------------------------------
XML is WRONG, and here it doesn't BELONG.
Neither in SPF, nor inside of DNS,
its fat and its bloated and so I express:
JSON - "The FAT FREE alternative to XML"
http://www.crockford.com/JSON/xml.html
-----------------------------------------------------------------
http://libspf.org -- ANSI C Sender Policy Framework library
http://libsrs.org -- ANSI C Sender Rewriting Scheme library
-----------------------------------------------------------------
PGP: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xBD3BF855

-------
To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your subscription,
please go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=spf-devel@v2.listbox.com
Re: Question about spf tests onhttp://www.midwestcs.com/spf/tests/ [ In reply to ]
Gary Levell writes:

> AOL's SPF DNS record:
>
> v=spf1 ip4:152.163.225.0/24 ip4:205.188.139.0/24 ip4:205.188.144.0/24
> ip4:205.188.156.0/23 ip4:205.188.159.0/24 ip4:64.12.136.0/23
> ip4:64.12.138.0/24 ptr:mx.aol.com ?all
>
> And now as XML:
>
> <spf v="1" ip4="152.163.225.0/24 205.188.139.0/24 205.188.144.0/24
> 205.188.156.0/23 205.188.159.0/24 64.12.136.0/23 64.12.138.0/24"
> ptr="mx.aol.com" all="?" />

No - that's not an accruate representation of that SPF record, or more to
the point, it couldn't be if the original record went 'ip4: ptr: ip4:'.

In other words, the SPF record includes an order to the tests, while the XML
version doesn't express an ordering (attributes aren't ordered in XML, are
they?), or if it does, it doesn't allow you to represent an ordering where a
given methods is used more that once, non-consecutively.

Regards,
Malcolm

-------
To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your subscription,
please go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=spf-devel@v2.listbox.com