I agree, at some point in the future:
MUST have RR
SHOULD NOT have TXT
Of course at that time, searching for TXT records SHOULD NOT occur.
This "point in the future" must be generous! Maybe 1 year after the RR type
is assigned. Maybe 2 years? Long enough for the DNS servers and the user
interfaces to be upgraded to support the RR type!
Guy
"Sure you saved money, but at what cost?" - Guy Watkins
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-spf-discuss(_at_)v2(_dot_)listbox(_dot_)com
[mailto:owner-spf-discuss(_at_)v2(_dot_)listbox(_dot_)com] On Behalf Of Dale
Ghent
Sent: Wednesday, October 06, 2004 12:45 PM
To: spf-discuss(_at_)v2(_dot_)listbox(_dot_)com
Subject: Re: [spf-discuss] SPF v1 draft for review
On Oct 6, 2004, at 12:32 PM, Stuart D. Gathman wrote:
The point is that later on when the new RR is widely deployed, then
this will
change to:
MUST have RR
MAY have TXT
I would play a little harder and say "SHOULD NOT have TXT"
This I think will give discretion to implementation authors whether to
pay attention to TXT records or not - or avail such a configurable
option in their software. A compromise if you will. The idea is to make
people s/TXT/SPF/ in their zone files.
I would think that early adopters are more likely to make this change
than those who implement after a RFC publishes the production protocol.
We have to draw a line somewhere. If TXT is allowed indefinitely, then
we might as well not bother getting a SPF RR. But that also means we
would be overloading TXT and imposing on it, which I am against.
/dale
-------
Sender Policy Framework: http://spf.pobox.com/
Archives at http://archives.listbox.com/spf-discuss/current/
http://www.InboxEvent.com/?s=d --- Inbox Event Nov 17-19 in Atlanta features
SPF and Sender ID.
To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your
subscription,
please go to
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=spf-discuss(_at_)v2(_dot_)listbox(_dot_)com