spf-discuss
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [spf-discuss] Re: Revision available: draft-crocker-dns-attrleaf-02

2006-10-24 06:58:23
In <453E0EAC(_dot_)4237(_at_)xyzzy(_dot_)claranet(_dot_)de> Frank Ellermann 
<nobody(_at_)xyzzy(_dot_)claranet(_dot_)de> writes:

Dave Crocker wrote on the namedroppers list:
 
<http://bbiw.net/specifications/draft-crocker-dns-attrleaf-02.txt>

For info, it lists RFC 4408 with its _spf convention for TXT records,
but not SPF records.   



Hi Dave

I see in draft-crocker-dns-attrleaf-02.txt that you mention RFC4408 as
using the _spf subdomain and suggesting it be put into a registry.
I'm not sure that is such a good idea.

The _spf label is *only* used in examples and it can be replaced by
anything that the publisher chooses.  There are no semantics defined
for that label and no reason why anyone other than the publisher needs
to be concerned with the name.

Also, you mention that the _spf label uses TXT records but in
RFC4408, the example usages include A and type99/SPF records also.

Finally, RFC4408 also mentions _spf_verify and _spf_rate, again in
examples only.


-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