On Mon, 6 Oct 2003, Meng Weng Wong wrote:
Tim, thanks for joining us. Here are my thoughts re dyndns.
If DynDNS domains don't publish SPF records, nothing will break.
Which is likely to be the case, at least initially, for reasons I'll
mention below.
If DynDNS domains do publish SPF records, there are three scenarios:
DynDNS will need to let users make a config decision:
1) publish no SPF (default)
2) publish SPF using the user-provided IP
3) publish SPF using the user-provided IP, and SPFinclude the ISP;
user may have to specify the ISP.
Users who use the SMTP servers of non-SPF ISPs should stick with #1.
Users who have their own SMTP servers on their boxes can switch to #2.
Users whose ISPs publish SPF records can move to #3.
Yes, and that added layer of complexity into our system is something we're
not prepared to jump into at the moment. Which is not to say we're ruling
it out out-of-hand. But as you said, not publishing records for those
domains doesn't break anything, and is safe for the time being.
And, as I mentioned in my earlier post, we have made the needed
modifications to our Custom DNS system such that customers can create
their own SPF records in the domains that they own.
Tim Wilde
--
Tim Wilde
twilde(_at_)dyndns(_dot_)org
Systems Administrator
Dynamic DNS Network Services
http://www.dyndns.org/
-------
Sender Permitted From: http://spf.pobox.com/
Archives at http://archives.listbox.com/spf-discuss/current/
To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your
subscription,
please go to
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname(_at_)©#«Mo\¯HÝÜîU;±¤Ö¤Íµø?¡