Hi SM,
Besides the SPF type issue, I believe there are still a number of
integrated protocol issues to address. How does the following RFCs
play into SPFBIS output, the SPF type and the overall BIS document?
Should RFC4408BIS update any of these documents?
[1] RFC4405 SUBMITTER SMTP Service Extension
[2] RFC4406 Sender ID: Authenticating E-Mail
[3] RFC4407 Purported Responsible Address (PRA)
For example:
In RFC 4406 (SenderID), section 3.1 says:
This section replaces the definition of the version identifier in
Section 4.5 of [RFC4408] and adds the concept of SPF record scopes.
In section 4.4, item 1:
1. If any records of type SPF are in the set, then all records of
type TXT are discarded.
Overall,
1) Do SenderID publishers need to drop the SPF type as well?
2) Do PRA/SUBMITTER compliant receivers need to also drop SPF type
queries?
3) Do SMTP vendors need to begin dropping SUBMITTER as well?
Procedurally, does SPFBIS need to address or take over these multiple
protocols integration concerns (including SMTP SUBMITTER receivers) or
should it just remain silent and allow vendors make a guess at all
this? What is the SPF summary in this regard for the application
integrator?
Should the IETF consider a new SenderID WG to discuss what are the
repercussions the SPFBIS results have on it?
--
HLS
[1] http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4405
[2] http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4406
[3] http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4407