Andrew Newton <andy(_at_)hxr(_dot_)us> writes:
Despite lack of agreement on the outcome, there is agreement on the
stated positions. In the words of Olafur:
1) Specify everyone to be compliant at all times.
2) Specify clearly full complaint state and tolerate non-compliant
state during phase-in.
Position 1 is predicated on the notion that a future RFC will deprecate
the (use of the) TXT record in favor of the SPF2 record. Position 2
demands that the TXT record be discouraged from use in the current
-protocol document.
I think Position 3 needs to be mentioned:
3) Remove SPF2 record and specify the use of TXT going forward.
and Position 4:
4) Schedule the deprecation of TXT now, not later.
Option 3 is so much superior to 1 and 2 from my perspective (MTA and
spam filter software) that will be doing many DNS queries, that it's
barely worth prioritizing 1 vs. 2.
That being said, in order of preference:
3 >> 4 >> 2 >> 1
Put another way:
- Doubling query volume is bad; inability to schedule in advance the
end of querying both records is bad.
- TXT is easier to deploy than SPF2 and no significant technical
argument favors SPF2 over TXT aside from puritanism.
Daniel
--
Daniel Quinlan
http://www.pathname.com/~quinlan/