I don't think IETF is going to let us put transition schedule into RFCs,
they've had far too many cases of schedules not being followed before.
Normally you put in the spec what is true for short future and then update
the spec as necessary.
On Wed, 24 Nov 2004, Alex van den Bogaerdt wrote:
On Tue, Nov 23, 2004 at 07:26:30PM -0500,
terry(_at_)ashtonwoodshomes(_dot_)com wrote:
wayne wrote:
Personally, I don't think that exclusively using a DNS RR in
the spec that won't exist on most people's name servers for
many months or years is very productive.
And you are certainly correct for the short term, and probably correct for
at least a couple years
to come.
What would be a realistic, conversative, number ?
If we want to get rid of TXT records there MUST be a MUST NOT USE
clause in the RFC. For instance (example numbers, change to fit):
The following is surrounded by the necessary "spf is optional, if
you are going to implement it then these are the requirements"
... "SPF is currently (2005) deployed using the TXT record. A specific
resource record for SPF has been assigned (see ...) and people are
encouraged to start using this new record ASAP.
However, for a smooth transition from TXT to the SPF RR, both need
to coexist for a while. The following time table MUST be used:
Years 2005 upto and including 2007:
Senders
- MUST provide a TXT record
- SHOULD provide an SPF record
- When present, the SPF record MUST provide the same information
Receivers
- MAY query an SPF record (and are encouraged to do so)
- MUST use it if found
- MUST NOT query nor use a TXT record if an SPF record is found
- MUST query and use a TXT record if an SPF record cannot be found
Year 2008 (transition period):
Sites
- MUST provide a TXT record
- MUST provide an SPF record
- the TXT record MUST provide the same information
Receivers
- SHOULD query an SPF record
- MUST use it if found
- MUST NOT query nor use a TXT record if an SPF record is found
- MUST query and use a TXT record if an SPF record cannot be found
Year 2009 and further
Sites
- MUST NOT provide a TXT record
- MUST provide an SPF record
Receivers
- MUST query and use an SPF record
- MUST NOT query a TXT record
"...
cheers,
Alex
-------
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
--
William Leibzon
Elan Networks
william(_at_)elan(_dot_)net