Folks,
1. Publishers MUST publish using the new SPF2 record type.
Change this to SHOULD
2. Publishers MAY also publish using TXT records.
Leave as is
JL> I'm OK with 1, 3, 5 and 6. However, 2 and 4 need to at least be SHOULD
This is starting to look like an interesting topic.
If 1 is SHOULD and 2 is MAY or SHOULD, then the publisher of the
information is not mandated to publish in any particular form.
If there were a problem with publishing the new record type, that would
be a significant barrier. Unless there is a claim that publishing such
data is highly problematic, then requiring the long-term record type to
be used seems to make sense.
What I have assumed we are facing is a problem with requiring that only
that record get used throughout the system. That's different than
whether it is published.
Looking at the other side of this, making publishing in a TXT record be
a SHOULD means that there is a long-term requirement for support,
whereas the intention is to use it for the near-term.
So, I suggest that #1 be MUST and #2 be MAY, with a note about the
reason that one is likely to want to publish #2 as well as #1.
What is the problem with this view?
d/
--
Dave Crocker <dcrocker-at-brandenburg-dot-com>
Brandenburg InternetWorking <www.brandenburg.com>
Sunnyvale, CA USA <tel:+1.408.246.8253>