On 2013-03-17 22:35, Doug Barton wrote:
On 3/17/2013 5:59 PM, Mark Andrews wrote:
The rational course would be to set a sunset date on TXT style spf
records. April 2016 looks like a good date. 10 years after RFC
4408 was published.
+1
Unfortunately there's really no need to change behaviour even if we have
a sunset date. As a server operator, I'd still check both (because it
doesn't cost anything) and I'd still publish both because it simply
doesn't matter.
Sure, some might eventually move away from TXT records, and this would
(IMO) be a good thing, but still...
Perhaps DK/DKIM got it right here, _spf.example.com. TXT records would
be a lot more flexible, wouldn't overload a zone/host's TXT records and
wouldn't require everyone to upgrade DNS infrastructure to add support.
But water under the bridge, it's not like inventing another standard for
the majority to ignore would help at this point.
--
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
