* Alex van den Bogaerdt:
On Thu, Aug 11, 2005 at 03:25:45PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
<http://www.enyo.de/fw/software/exim/spf-update.html>
I urge the SPF folks to consider the updates mentioned at the end of
the document. The eleven-step update procedure to implement a simple
IP address change should provide some incentive to do this.
This is nothing new. Consider moving a web site to another server:
Many ignorant newbies have been bitten by DNS-caching, to the point
where they believe it is necessary to roll out a new server and keep
the old one running for a week.
Lowering TTLs before server migration isn't the problem. It's the
needless complexity because SPF as specified and implemented has zero
tolerance towards temporary DNS inconsistencies. This is not such a
big issue with SMTP itself (it prefers queuing to bouncing) or HTTP
(some clients will fall back on additional IP addresses).