On 3/13/2013 05:09, G.W. Haywood wrote:
Ref. : Early implementations used TXT records for implementation
before the new record type was commonly available in DNS software.
Use of TXT records for SPF was intended
as a transitional mechanism. However, according to the current RFC,
RFC 4408, section 3.1.1, "An SPF-compliant domain name SHOULD have
SPF records of both RR types. A
compliant domain name MUST have a record of at least one type," and
as such, TXT record use is not deprecated.[2]
The SPF type RR seems to me to be dying. Hardly anyone uses it.
This is very true. I updated my management interface to encourage "SPF"
records, and to automatically create matching TXT records, but only
because it's easier to sanity check when I know the intent is SPF.
I almost wouldn't bother with SPF records these days though, except that
the code was already written.
--
Dave Warren
http://www.hireahit.com/
http://ca.linkedin.com/in/davejwarren
_______________________________________________
Please visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users to unsubscribe
from this list
bind-users mailing list
bind-users@lists.isc.org
https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users
