--On Tuesday, January 13, 2004 11:19 AM +1100 geoffj <geoffj(_at_)thestrix(_dot_)net>
wrote:
Thanks Greg
In the end this boils done to a personal preference
(not of course the way to run a protocol!). Since we
have (as yet) no type=SPF and have decided to use TXT
and not SRV or whatever, it becomes a sort of hierarchy
question whether to lookup TXT for the domain or lookup
MX. To my eye the latter would have been better, since
it means less lookup, and less parsing (programmer's
perspective!). And it is less subversive, because the TXT
record is implicitly tagged as related to email by placing it
in the MX record. ...
For all this, the answer to my original question is clear.
Admins are constructing TXT records for TXT lookup, and
patches are doing TXT lookups, not parsing MX for TXT
records. Not the way I would have done it perhaps, but
it's too late to argue otherwise.
I'm not 100% sure what you mean by "placing the TXT in the MX record" but
I'm pretty sure you can't do that. TXT and MX are two different record
types and you can't put arbitrary text into an MX record... it only takes
an integer and a hostname.
This is sort of off-topic for the list... if you need more info about this,
you're welcome to contact me off-list and we can save everyone else's
bandwidth.
Thanks
gregc
--
Greg Connor <gconnor(_at_)nekodojo(_dot_)org>
-------
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-02.9.4.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?¡