In <200511161423(_dot_)24892(_dot_)scott(_at_)kitterman(_dot_)com> Scott
Kitterman <spf2(_at_)kitterman(_dot_)com> writes:
How about DKIM using Type 99 instead of waiting for it's own record type to
get established by the IANA? As I understand it there is no risk of
collision due to where DKIM puts it's records.
For the same reason that there is no risk to SPF collisions, there is
no risk for TXT collisions.
DKIM records do not, at this time, have a magic number at the
beginning of their records. This would be needed in order to
distinguish between DKIM records and other uses of TXT/SPF.
Mind you, I'm still of the opinion that the SPF DNS RR type is useless
and we should never use anything other than TXT. I think the same
thing DKIM. (Unless, for some reason, the DKIM records get moved from
their _domainkeys subdomain, which would break a lot of DKIM stuff.)
-wayne
-------
Sender Policy Framework: http://www.openspf.org/
Archives at http://archives.listbox.com/spf-discuss/current/
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