On Wed, 10 Jan 2007, wayne wrote:
I appreciate this, and I hope the results are no where near the 20%
you remembered. Even though I don't see any point in type99 records
for SPF since TXT records work fine, I still see a lot of use for
other newer types of DNS records.
I would agree with you for v=spf1. There is just no incentive to
publish type 99 records for v=spf1 (except the geek factor). However, I see a
use for type 99 for the next version of SPF. Which will not use TXT at all if
I have any say (except for fetching v=spf1 records).
--
Stuart D. Gathman <stuart(_at_)bmsi(_dot_)com>
Business Management Systems Inc. Phone: 703 591-0911 Fax: 703 591-6154
"Confutatis maledictis, flammis acribus addictis" - background song for
a Microsoft sponsored "Where do you want to go from here?" commercial.
-------
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