On Fri, 12 Jan 2007, Alex van den Bogaerdt wrote:
On Thu, Jan 11, 2007 at 10:25:11PM -0600, Seth Goodman wrote:
In fact, I
doubt anyone participating here even wants the type99 records.
FWIW, I think it is a good thing to have a separate record type. I
only wished we could have migrated the entire user base to it and
stop using TXT... The problem with using TXT is that there's more
than just SPF using it, and people can run into unexpected problems
(DNS reply truncated -> use tcp) while for others there's no problem
with exactly the same size SPF record.
Right now is the time to get familiar with SPF (the DNS RR type) so
that when spf v3 comes around, SPF the protocol can use this type
and forget about TXT. We should encourage software vendors and alike
to implement the SPF RR type.
+1
--
William Leibzon
Elan Networks
william(_at_)elan(_dot_)net
-------
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