>Er, so? If the tool to bundle up the needed bits for SPF-as-text and >SPF-as-binary are similarly trivial, why should we care if people who >want to use a feature of the Internet can't persuade their provider to >make a trivial change. Because there's no point in checking records that don't exist. RFC 4408 has been out for six years, and people who run large mail systems report that the number of type 99 records is basically zero. To several significant digits, all type 99 queries are wasted traffic. >Soon, y'all will be saying we should give up on DNSSEC because so few >registrars support it in their web UIs. Registrars will because they have to. The registries (or maybe ICANN) will beat them up. I'm looking forward to a couple of decades of the DNS crowd complaining that there's no DNSSEC at zone cuts below TLDs, while remaining impervious to the concept that it's because upgrading provisioning to handle them is even harder than upgrades for simple records like type 99. R's, John _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf