-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Gerald Oskoboiny writes:
This leads to an increasing number of DNS requests to maintain
compatability across versions. This seems (to me) like a bad
idea given that we can avoid it simply by using a standard name
for all versions of SPF.
Agreed. _smtp_client or _spf sound good to me if the use of
underscores is blessed by the relevant IETF folks, and there
are no major compatibility issues with deployed DNS software.
+1 from me, too.
- --j.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Exmh CVS
iD8DBQE/lYILQTcbUG5Y7woRApIwAKC0gMsguk9++++GXf3roQ+nO47nPQCbBzdC
cAJBYaqS0lwkHsBhtzfZLEg=
=6/sX
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-------
Sender Permitted From: http://spf.pobox.com/
Archives at http://archives.listbox.com/spf-discuss/current/
Latest draft at http://spf.pobox.com/draft-mengwong-spf-02.txt
To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your
subscription,
please go to
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname(_at_)©#«Mo\¯HÝÜîU;±¤Ö¤Íµø?¡