Re: [spf-discuss] SPFv2.1: whether, why, and what?

On Mon, Mar 13, 2006 at 08:33:19PM +0000, Constantine A. Murenin wrote:

> > IMO we should make the SPF record type mandatory or we should
> > abandon it entirely (both for version>1 of course).
> Don't forget to consider what the situation is today.
>
> Not every domain owner runs their own DNS. Most registrars allow one
> to publish TXT-records, not SPF. (And there are still some major
> registrars that don't allow one to publish even TXT records, but
> that's another problem.) If you are only going to support SPF records,
> then many domain owners are out of luck with spf2.1.
Indeed they are.  They can always use spf1.  Besides: if, in a
couple of years, SPF-type records aren't supported on a large
scale, I think we can forget about SPF altogether.

2c
alex

-------
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