IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dnsext] [spfbis] Obsoleting SPF RRTYPE

Ted Lemon <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com> Fri, 26 April 2013 18:42 UTC

Return-Path: <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com>
X-Original-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 66CE221F985F; Fri, 26 Apr 2013 11:42:08 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -106.282
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.282 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.317, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id B4B4i2dOS40o; Fri, 26 Apr 2013 11:42:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from exprod7og110.obsmtp.com (exprod7og110.obsmtp.com [64.18.2.173]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C136221F9579; Fri, 26 Apr 2013 11:42:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from shell-too.nominum.com ([64.89.228.229]) (using TLSv1) by exprod7ob110.postini.com ([64.18.6.12]) with SMTP ID DSNKUXrKf5dP1eZ1hFJHYqJesJXfjAlUeHln@postini.com; Fri, 26 Apr 2013 11:42:07 PDT
Received: from archivist.nominum.com (archivist.nominum.com [64.89.228.108]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "*.nominum.com", Issuer "Go Daddy Secure Certification Authority" (verified OK)) by shell-too.nominum.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 43A6A1B80E6; Fri, 26 Apr 2013 11:42:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from webmail.nominum.com (cas-02.win.nominum.com [64.89.228.132]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "mail.nominum.com", Issuer "Go Daddy Secure Certification Authority" (verified OK)) by archivist.nominum.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3B75C190061; Fri, 26 Apr 2013 11:42:07 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from Ted.Lemon@nominum.com)
Received: from MBX-01.WIN.NOMINUM.COM ([64.89.228.133]) by CAS-02.WIN.NOMINUM.COM ([64.89.228.132]) with mapi id 14.02.0318.004; Fri, 26 Apr 2013 11:42:07 -0700
From: Ted Lemon <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com>
To: Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org>
Thread-Topic: [spfbis] [dnsext] Obsoleting SPF RRTYPE
Thread-Index: AQHOQp6UBXubqTI8/ESMN/lsrU52YZjpS5qA
Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2013 18:42:06 +0000
Message-ID: <8D23D4052ABE7A4490E77B1A012B630775160B14@mbx-01.win.nominum.com>
References: <20130425013317.36729.qmail@joyce.lan> <80ADB3EE-17FD-4628-B818-801CB71BCBFE@virtualized.org> <BB8C643A-FC46-4B2F-B677-F1B7CAB0E79F@frobbit.se> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1304251030380.65043@joyce.lan> <14A728AE-83DC-4C1F-A88A-6F988D37F2C7@frobbit.se> <20130425154235.GP23770@besserwisser.org> <5179691B.50602@qti.qualcomm.com> <5179980F.9090606@dougbarton.us> <5179B10E.705@qti.qualcomm.com> <5179BC32.8050205@dougbarton.us> <6.2.5.6.2.20130425163243.0bedb6d0@resistor.net> <8D23D4052ABE7A4490E77B1A012B63077515FDEB@mbx-01.win.nominum.com> <CAC4RtVA3tC_dSoZrSaeC-XEx++O+aoZx1ApynzYCn-QHrMDLzA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAC4RtVA3tC_dSoZrSaeC-XEx++O+aoZx1ApynzYCn-QHrMDLzA@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [192.168.1.10]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252"
Content-ID: <41AE2352D5BCD14B8E56812D805FD5CE@nominum.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: "spfbis@ietf.org" <spfbis@ietf.org>, Pete Resnick <presnick@qti.qualcomm.com>, "dnsext@ietf.org" <dnsext@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [dnsext] [spfbis] Obsoleting SPF RRTYPE
X-BeenThere: dnsext@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: DNS Extensions working group discussion list <dnsext.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dnsext>, <mailto:dnsext-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dnsext>
List-Post: <mailto:dnsext@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dnsext-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsext>, <mailto:dnsext-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2013 18:42:08 -0000

On Apr 26, 2013, at 12:53 PM, Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org> wrote:
> It would also be good for ADs to put things into the last call
> notices, pointing out things that participants in other areas might
> want to look at.  We don't have a habit of doing that, and we should.
> Even something like, "This specification involves aspects of
> [technology X] and [technology Y]; experts in those technologies
> should pay particular attention and provide reviews and comments,"
> might make a big difference.

Yes.

> Why, specifically, is it bad to use TXT records in an "_spf."
> subdomain for this purpose?  What harm does it cause, specifically.
> Let's bring that out clearly, and have that part of the discussion,
> realizing that some possible arguments already have answers:

I think it's mostly harmless, but it's not what 4408bis does.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email