"Douglas" == Douglas Otis <dotis(_at_)mail-abuse(_dot_)org> writes:
Douglas> There is no advantage defining duplicate records
Douglas> types using TXT records composed with ad hoc syntax that
Douglas> seem to be solutions searching for a problem. To do so,
Douglas> in this case, would suggest all DNS record types should
Douglas> be defined using a TXT record.
I would disagree that SPF is a solution waiting for a problem; I think
many people here regard SPF (and its derivatives) as a solution to a
problem their very interested in (albeit a slightly different one to
the one that CSV/CSA solves).
I was simply suggesting that if this WG chooses to advance a proposal
based on both the marid-core and marid-csv drafts, there is an
argument for using a consistent record syntax for both aspects. But
that if we go down that route we should still (IMHO) keep the records
separate, contrary to what the Unified SPF folks are proposing.
Of course, using SPF syntax for CSA records loses us the additional
data processing in the DNS server, so there's still an argument for
staying with SRV for CSV and TXT for Sender ID.