spf-discuss
[Top] [All Lists]

[spf-discuss] Re: Verisign and SPF

2006-12-07 15:34:38
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Stuart D. Gathman wrote:
I see that networksolutions.com still has no SPF record.  Remember when
they had the bright idea of returning the IP of their Ad server for
non-existent domains?  (Effectively eliminating NXDOMAIN.) The main
public argument against it was that MTAs depended on NXDOMAIN to reject
spam from non-existent domains.

Has it occurred to Verisign, I wonder, that if SPF were universal enough
that we could reject on SPF NONE/NEUTRAL, that argument would no longer
stand?  Perhaps they could get on the SPF bandwagon in the hopes of
bringing back advertising for invalid domains in the future ...

The various DNS resolvers' "delegation-only" features that were introduced 
back then will never go away (thankfully), so I doubt that Verisign is 
still hoping...

If they were nice and worked with the community, they might actually get
some system (not necessarily the above) accepted to let them do the Ad
for invalid domain service.

I don't think there is a point in getting rid of the delegation-only policy 
for registries.  Registries should delegate and nothing else.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFFeJaPwL7PKlBZWjsRAjiWAKDfYNT+46ClyrwMKAaaKlODCiowgQCeK9uY
1JkO4pDT2ag76xo5cYvWpq8=
=M3jq
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

-------
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/?list_id=735

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