IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dnsext] Obsoleting SPF RRTYPE

Måns Nilsson <mansaxel@besserwisser.org> Thu, 25 April 2013 15:42 UTC

Return-Path: <mansaxel@besserwisser.org>
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 C1F7021F9605; Thu, 25 Apr 2013 08:42:37 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.281
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.281 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.019, BAYES_00=-2.599, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, NO_RELAYS=-0.001]
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 SB5DlEYBdBCR; Thu, 25 Apr 2013 08:42:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from jaja.besserwisser.org (primary.se [IPv6:2a01:298:4::53]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 38BA121F9604; Thu, 25 Apr 2013 08:42:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by jaja.besserwisser.org (Postfix, from userid 1004) id 6522A9EF0; Thu, 25 Apr 2013 17:42:35 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2013 17:42:35 +0200
From: Måns Nilsson <mansaxel@besserwisser.org>
To: Patrik Fältström <paf@frobbit.se>
Message-ID: <20130425154235.GP23770@besserwisser.org>
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>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha1"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="ftQmbtOmUf2cr8rB"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <14A728AE-83DC-4C1F-A88A-6F988D37F2C7@frobbit.se>
X-URL: http://vvv.besserwisser.org
X-Purpose: More of everything NOW!
X-happyness: Life is good.
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14)
Cc: spfbis@ietf.org, "dnsext@ietf.org Group" <dnsext@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [dnsext] 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: Thu, 25 Apr 2013 15:42:37 -0000

Subject: Re: [dnsext] Obsoleting SPF RRTYPE Date: Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 05:03:55PM +0200 Quoting Patrik Fältström (paf@frobbit.se):
> 
> On 25 apr 2013, at 16:44, John R Levine <johnl@taugh.com> wrote:
> 
> > In any event, the SPF draft is in WGLC.  Feel free to read the extensive discussion in the list archives and let them know how you feel.
> 
> They know how i feel. We in IETF do believe in rough consensus. I am this time on the rough side.
> 
> That does not imply I am quiet in other places, and I am as many others nervous over the implications.

This is a slippery slope. One record overload is not bad, but it sort
of opens the floodgates for systematic overloading. DNSEXT and DNSOP
certainly need to get involved; because this is way bigger than just SPF.

And IMNSHO spfbis is out of scope prescribing TXT records, just because
of this contagiousness.

For the record: I think that the spfbis draft is unfit for publication
as RFC unless TXT records are deprectaed as only carrier of data.
-- 
Måns Nilsson     primary/secondary/besserwisser/machina
MN-1334-RIPE                             +46 705 989668
... I want FORTY-TWO TRYNEL FLOATATION SYSTEMS installed within
SIX AND A HALF HOURS!!!

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email