On Tuesday, February 28, 2012 07:52:37 PM Hector wrote: > Scott Kitterman wrote: > >> If your DNS hosting company doesn't support them find another one > >> or complain to them. You are paying them to host your DNS services > >> and this is a basic part of the job. > > > > To what hosting company should I switch if I want to publish SPF records > > of Type SPF? > > SMTP hosting systems are not stuck using their ISP's primary name > servers currently limited in their customer's UI management of > domain(s) zone file(s). > > You could always use your own name server or use another that is more > flexible. No need to switch ISPs. Some may even allow you to do > offline editing (export/import) of your zone files. > > If you don't wish to have your own primary DNS server, there are many > out there you can switch to, some even free, and perhaps for only > using a faster, more 24x7 reliable name server than their ISP's name > servers who could be tier limiting the customer. > > I've gone through this issue a # of times just with SRV with customers > and their ISPs was limited in the UI in some way. Not an issue today > with SRV, but the idea of installing or switching the name servers > was always a last recourse option considered. > > Yet, even if the ISP or with your own name server you added the SPF > type, that still didn't mean all query paths taken would be > successful. It could work 100% with testing short distance paths and > locally, but from a remote different path? It may not work. That was > the early RFC3597 issues I experienced that basically made you just > punt of the idea of using new RR type with the obvious overhead waste. > But my experience today, the RFC3597 issues are much less. I would > not hesitate to finally enabling SPF type as a default option in our > wares, at least give a new look for reasonable feasible results on par > with the migration that has materialized. Hector, I know all about how I could publish SPF records. You are missing my point. In the previous message it was suggested that people who use a hosted DNS service should switch if their service doesn't support Type SPF. The problem is that, as far as I'm aware, none of them do. I have not determined any source of economic motivation to get that to change. "Support this or I'll take my business to someone that does" is an empty threat unless someone actually does. It's also not something anyone other than DNS purists would worry about. No one is going to switch providers and risk downtime in order to publish a record that to a very, very close approximation accomplished nothing. Scott K _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf