Arvel Hathcock wrote:
(2) SSP record type (TXT vs. something new). Only 4 messages in
discussion, mostly saying "if you support TXT, don't bother with
anything else." Again, no clear consensus.
If a new RR can solve the wildcard issue and we feel that this is a
significant issue worth solving (or at least addressing) then perhaps we
should create a system that looks for a new RR first and failing that,
falls back to TXT.
I don't think the "if you support TXT, don't bother with anything else"
position is correct. If we come out with a spec that states "SSP
clients must query for new RR first, then TXT" senders would be right to
expect compliance. This frees senders to deploy the new RR when they
need and are able to do so. Until then, TXT.
+1
--
Sincerely
Hector Santos, CTO
http://www.santronics.com
http://santronics.blogspot.com
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html