spf-discuss
[Top] [All Lists]

RE: [spf-discuss] Re: Another test case for the test suite...

2007-01-11 21:26:46
Don Lee wrote on Thursday, January 11, 2007 9:51 PM -0600:

If this "death by tables of error codes" thread flows from a desire to
migrate to a new DNS record type for SPF by forcing implementors to
use it immediately, this is not wise. The implementations should use
existing facilities (TXT) and migrate to the new record type if/when
it makes sense, and with reasonable rules as to when the "new stuff"
is appropriate, and how fallback should work.  We should not try to
build the fallback into the semantics of the "single query".

I don't think anyone wants to force anything of that sort.  In fact, I
doubt anyone participating here even wants the type99 records.  During
the RFC process, folks who were very concerned about overuse of DNS TXT
records wanted SPF to have its own record type.  The new TXT record was
incorporated into the RFC to satisfy this objection, even though there
were enough records already in the wild that everyone has to query TXT
for the foreseeable future.

Now that type99 records are in the RFC and DNS software is beginning to
support them, domain owners _may_ decide to publish their SPF policy in
type99 records and recipients _may_ decide to query for them.  If they
query for both, there is a legitimate question as to how to handle the
various combinations of DNS errors and absence of SPF records.

--
Seth Goodman

-------
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>