spf-discuss
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Re: draft-ietf-marid-protocol-03

2004-09-24 08:30:41
Koen Martens wrote:

On Thu, Sep 23, 2004 at 09:57:02PM -0700, Greg Connor wrote:
I agree, we should try to get an experimental RR type allocated for SPF.

So do I.

Another point regarding this, as Meng pointed out in irc, MS seems to be claiming that using TXT records in DNS to fight forgery is their idea. Therefore, moving forward with another record type might steer us further away from disputed territory, if the patent gets approved.

This could be perceived as 'giving in', but I don't see what can be done 
against it. However, getting the RR type for spf seems like a very good idea, 
and from what I understood this won't be that much trouble.

So what _is_ the procedure, and who's going to carry it out?

I don't forsee anyone dropping support for TXT though. The RR type has to be available for a long time (I would say at least a year) before enough servers and clients support it. It would have to be a long-term goal, but I still think it's a good goal.

Unfortunatelly, this could take a while for all systems to support it, if ever.

Koen

I can see it now...

foo   IN   SPF   1.2.3.4

--
Chuck Mead <csm(_at_)redhat(_dot_)com>
Instructor II (and resident Postfix bigot), GLS
Disclaimer: "It's Thursday and my name is Locutus of B0rk!"
Addendum: "Bwahahaha! Fire up the orbital mind-control lasers!"