spf-discuss
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: TXT Records

2003-11-21 14:04:07
Eric S. Raymond wrote:

Jonathan Steinert <hachi(_at_)kuiki(_dot_)net>:

We could do the first draft as a full set of phases with dates (changeable depending on when the draft is accepted) where specific
 milestones must be met.


Now that's not a bad idea.

And then Dan Boresjo wrote:

The TXT mechanism should be limited to pre-RFC trials. That way, the
RFC publication date automatically becomes the sunset date for TXT
records.

So, if this idea is any good we need to come up with a reasonable order to do things in. The items appear up for debate are:

TXT record deployment/deprication
SPF-RR record deployment
CNAME redirection deployment/deprication (for domains incapable of TXT and SPF-RR publishing)
HTTP lookup deployment/deprication

Personally I'm very much against the HTTP mechanism, so I'd like to see this order:

TXT record deployment
CNAME redirection deployment
[RFC process]
SPF-RR deployment
[Transition period]
CNAME deprication
TXT record deprication

Comments? (apart from my distaste for an HTTP overload)

Here ends my ramblings for now
--Jonathan Steinert

-------
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-02.6.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?¡


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>