On Fri, 2004-05-21 at 09:51, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
Agreed. There are other, usually local, uses for TXT that we don't want to
stomp on or displace with the SPF records. More global uses for TXT records
include IPSEC records. Conflicting with such records could be a problem for
a lot of the more technically savvy users.
But what's the potential timetable of getting a new record used and
implemented in the more common DNS servers?
The was pretty much the rationaly behind restricting OMX to all A
records. A compact code implementing the rich and verbose semantics of
SPF in 32-bit masks is devised and publicised. OMX as described in
spring '03 did not have a way to simply delegate -- the delegation
semantics in SPF are excellent -- but there's canonical names, those
can be used to refer to another A record.
Hello, new list
--
david nicol
"People used to be able to read my thoughts, but
it doesn't appear to work any more. Should I eat less cheese?"
-- Elizabeth Woods