spf-discuss
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Redundant / unused SPF features?

2004-01-26 18:56:51
In 
<2A1D4C86842EE14CA9BC80474919782E01113386(_at_)mou1wnexm02(_dot_)vcorp(_dot_)ad(_dot_)vrsn(_dot_)com>
 "Hallam-Baker, Phillip" <pbaker(_at_)verisign(_dot_)com> writes:

      It kind of finishes an argument if someone says 'that feature is
used in 50% of all SPF record sets', for that matter the argument is also
likely to end quickly if the answer is '2 deployments out of 5000 used
feature X', the admins say they could switch easily.


Great minds think alike....  Did you see Wechsler's post earlier today
listing the stats he has for the various mechanisms in use?

It appears that IPv6 support could go away.  ;->

include: is used around 10% of the time and exists: is used around 3%
of the time.  Redirect= and exp= are not very common, but then, I
don't think they are very controversial either.


I guess one point is that even if there are only 2 deployments out of
5000 used, those two may be really important.


-wayne

-------
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
Wiki: 
http://spfwiki.infinitepenguins.net/pmwiki.php/SenderPermittedFrom/HomePage
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>