spf-discuss
[Top] [All Lists]

Migration to SPF type99

2005-08-11 19:36:22
SPF List,

I had a thought (yes, I know, the media has been alerted) to reduce redundant DNS data transfer as regards the migration to the SPF RR from the TXT RR.

Does it make any sense to add a new option for an SPF record to the specification that allows for the TXT record to indicate support exists or does not exist for SPF under the new SPF RR record? For example:

TXT "v=spf1 {all the other stuff normally published} [+|-]spf"

where the trailing "spf" above offers a hint to an MTA that an SPF RR is also being published. Obviously, the option name need not be "spf", but could alternately be something like "rr" or even "spfrr", the point is adding something that tells the software interpreting the record that the requested answer is available or not available via the SPF RR record. This might also be valuable for some publishers to avoid redundant lookups where their DNS implementation for whatever reason does not or cannot support the new SPF RR record and thus can supply a clue to avoid the requesting MTA having to do an extra lookup that is guaranteed to fail - saving everyone a bit of a headache.

Somewhere down the road, publishers might also want to use this ability to reduce the amount of traffic from redundant data being sent by both a TXT RR and SPF RR request. Eventually, just publishing a TXT "v=spf1 +spf" could be interpreted as, "why yes, we do publish SPF data, but your answer is found at our SPF RR, so use that".

I just thought it might be nice to have this feature as part of a proactive plan for the migration away from the TXT SPF record.

Best,

Alan Maitland
WebMaster(_at_)Commerco(_dot_)Net
The Commerce Company - Making Commerce Simple(sm)
http://WWW.Commerco.Com/




<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>