wayne wrote:
We are *NOT* committed to moving over to the type99 SPF
record.
It's something that has to happen in the next decade, not
tomorrow or this year. For the foreseeable future we've
to support both ways as transparently as possible.
Ideas to invent new modifiers for this purpose strike me
as horrible.
At this point in time everybody supporting / publishing
SPF can also support / publish TXT. If he picks SPF only
for obscure reasons he deserves whatever happens.
E.g. a TXT policy trying to include a SPF-only policy is
broken. The opposite is okay, probably not forever, but
for some years.
If, some day, the problems with type99 records go away
and there is a very wide deployment of type99 records,
we can create an update to the SPF RFC depreciating TXT
records. That day is not today.
+1 And this updated SPF version probably won't be v=spf1.
The only reason that could force us to accelerate this
transition is another wild and wonderful scheme (ab)using
TXT for $PURPOSE.
Bye, Frank