DFA limitations within Allegro...

I have been investigating the features of the DFA capabilities within Allegro for the past week. I have a situation which I believe the DFA features may be lacking.

 When it comes to classifying groups of package types and assigning them a DFA_DEV_CLASS at the symbol level ( unsure of how to specify that within the dra exactly ) I understand the premise. I intend to use the this for BGA's for example, to have extra clearance around the body for rework. Now from my understanding, if the BGA is placed on the top the DFA spreadsheet for top spacing data would apply, and should the BGA be place on the bottom, the bottom spacing data would apply. Works great, I have that functionality working. 

 Now when it comes to perhaps a press fit connector that requires greater spacing on the bottom than the top, I would use a DFA_BOUND_TOP and DFA_BOUND_BOTTOM shape, request say 100 mils for the top spacing data and perhaps 175 mils for the bottom spacing data. The connector being placed on the top side would have its DFA_BOUND_TOP boundary the extent of the body since the pins are within the body perimeter. As for the DFA_BOUND_BOTTOM shape, it would just encompass the pins because the critical spacing distance it to the pins. Everything works great, I get 100 mils on top and 175 on the bottom. 

The issue I have arises when there are differing spacing requirements for top and bottom and a part is placed both on the top and bottom, then the spacing requirements to not relect the intent. Going back to the example of a press fit connector ( or TH series ) since they are both of the same classification the spacing for the mirrored connector should be 175 on top and 100 on bottom ( reverse of top placed one).  However the spacing still maintains 100 on top and 175 on bottom due to the spacing table. The classification does not apply to the instance level but at the package level essentially. Hope that is somewhat clear? It would be possible to re-assign all mirrored TH or press fit connectors to a new classification within the board file. But I'm trying to limit the amount or reassignment and re-classification for the designer and to make this as "seemless" as possible by having the correct classifications up front in the library.

 There are other ways to create adequate spacing ( package keepouts etc at board level ) but I was curious if anyone has been able to solve this within the DFA spreadsheet?

 Thanks and sorry for the long winded post.

Mike