On Fri, 12 Jan 2007, Julian Mehnle wrote:
I don't see "much resistance to just using TXT records". It works fine for
SPFv1. However, it's not "the clean solution" and should not be repeated
for SPFv3, given that most of the non-MS world is now slowly beginning to
catch up with the SPF RR type. When SPFv3 is ready in perhaps 18-24
months, it is likely to be supported _much_ better than today -- unless we
play satisfied with only the TXT type being used and don't do anything to
promote the SPF type.
Not only that, but even your DNS is *still* obsolete in 18-24 months,
you can continue to publish v=spf1 in TXT records.
I see a problem for braindead servers that timeout for unknown record types
when that happens, however. Is it too much to hope that by then at least
some nasty bugs will be fixed, even without any new record type support?
--
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