There was a clear agreement to a new RR type (which is
consistent with draft-iab-dns-choices-00, which basically
says that "Thou shalt not use TXT records").
Which is a draft, has no standing and merely states the authors predjudices
without honestly representing the contrary opinion.
There were two problems raised:
* one is old: the coexistence of the two RR types and the
transition period. As all SPFers and MARIDers know, this
question has been hashed and rehashed so many times that most
people no longer want to hear about it :-)
This was discussed and at the FTC meeting. The view there was that should be
no new RR and that any new RR will be ignored. The TXT record is final and
will not be revised.
If you disagree with this decision then take it up with the UN.
Nevertheless,
IETFers like Peter Koch were extremely vocal about it, asking
for no TXT records at all and just the new record,
disclaiming installed base as either inexistant or
unimportant.
Well he is wrong.
These two questions did not seem to be a stopper for most
people. The WG should formally review the DNS part of the
draft now if the "SPF community" ask it to do so.
Please save yourselves the effort. The standards will be ratified in another
venue shortly.