-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Hallam-Baker, Phillip wrote:
> Which would at the same time provide an opportunity to address the one
> part of SPF/Sender-ID that does give me significant concern, the
> exclusive appropriation of the TXT record.
>
> A prefixed record would be much less likely to collide with other
> records.
>
> A proposal has been made to cut an new RR but as the group discovered
> 50% of the legacy infrastructure does not support new RRs despite
> claims to the contrary. Support in this case has to be production
> quality, not the ability to coax particular bits out of a server in
> certain limited circumstances that no network admi is ever going to
> accept on a production server.
What about the new SPF RR type (99) recently assigned by IANA?
$ named -v
BIND 9.3.1
$ grep TYPE99 /etc/bind/zones/net.mehnle
@ IN TYPE99 \# 15 0e763d73706631206d78202d616c6c
$ dig -v
DiG 9.3.1
$ dig mehnle.net TYPE99 +sho
\# 15 0E763D73706631206D78202D616C6C
$ host -V
host version 991529
$ host -t 99 mehnle.net
mehnle.net 99 # ( ; unknown type
0E 76 3D 73 70 66 31 20 6D 78 20 2D 61 6C 6C ; .v=spf1 mx -all
)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFDD4ewwL7PKlBZWjsRAsJ1AJ9mS+vB3+zp5MVWTB5x5Q6N4oZK1gCgvn+e
hOvx+pNMHSIPVU1Q9HnvzOg=
=+/dM
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf