spf-discuss
[Top] [All Lists]

RE: [spf-discuss] proposed spf3 non-contiguous address notation

2007-01-14 20:59:44
Alex van den Bogaerdt wrote on Sunday, January 14, 2007 9:14 PM -0600:

On Sun, Jan 14, 2007 at 08:59:21PM -0600, Seth Goodman wrote:

For many hosts, scattered around, the following could help:

"v=spf1 exists:%{ir}._spf.example.com -all"

That's not a realistic answer, but it is another way to do it.

Why wouldn't this be realistic?

Because it doesn't solve the original problem, which was to reduce DNS
loading for domains with many designated hosts and who send a lot of
mail.  The SPF record you gave is short, but it requires an additional
query for each evaluation, so it defeats the purpose.  Besides, I said
it was for the case where you have a block of addresses that don't
happen to align with a bit mask.

--
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>