Re: [dnsext] [spfbis] Obsoleting SPF RRTYPE

I would like to suggest before eliminating (deprecating) SPF RRTYPE, in 
SPFBIS, the SPFBIS/DNS key cogs find out from the DNS vendors (or 
whoever manages/codes the main infrastructure DNS servers) why they are 
not supporting unnamed type processing?  Are they even aware of this 
need?  I believe BIND supports it, but not Microsoft DNS server.  How 
about others?  Are they all/mostly based on Bind source code?

I tried to find out last March 2012 in the Microsoft Windows Server Tech 
Forum [1] if Microsoft DNS v5.0 supported RFC3597 [2] or unnamed type 
processing, and it wasn't known or I just didn't reach the right folks. 
It was surprising that not even Ace Fakey was not aware of this need.

--
HLS

[1] 
http://social.technet.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/winserverNIS/thread/5841e884-db22-42a1-8530-615a375662cc/

[2] http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3597

On 4/28/2013 9:07 AM, Hector Santos wrote:
> But this isn't a complex problem. It is a simple solution.  The goal is
> for the docs to described what DEVELOPERS need to do, or should do, to
> prepare for the "Future."
>
> o Select method of SPF lookups
>     (_) SPF RRTYPE only
>     (*) TXT RRTYPE only
>     (_) BOTH (SPF/TXT)
>
> Protocol Options are always part of the design game.
>
> The only real problem, is that we currently do not have any control over
> this future (DNS Servers supporting unnamed type processing).  There is
> seriously a lack of communications going on. Where are these DNS
> vendors? Who are the key folks who have some "control" over this future?
>
>
> On 4/28/2013 8:18 AM, Andrew Sullivan wrote:
>> No hat.
>>
>> On Sat, Apr 27, 2013 at 10:29:40PM -0400, Stuart Gathman wrote:
>>
>>> I will be implementing this myself in the next week or so.  Should
>>> be very simple.
>>
>> I believe it was Mencken who said, "For every complex problem there is
>> an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong."
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> A
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> spfbis mailing list
> spfbis@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spfbis
>
>