IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dnsext] Obsoleting SPF RRTYPE

Ted Lemon <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com> Thu, 25 April 2013 16:01 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 4013B21F9650 for <dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 25 Apr 2013 09:01:55 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -106.352
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.352 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.053, BAYES_00=-2.599, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, 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 0LAZlWWhm2hs for <dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 25 Apr 2013 09:01:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from exprod7og111.obsmtp.com (exprod7og111.obsmtp.com [64.18.2.175]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D019A21F9642 for <dnsext@ietf.org>; Thu, 25 Apr 2013 09:01:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from shell-too.nominum.com ([64.89.228.229]) (using TLSv1) by exprod7ob111.postini.com ([64.18.6.12]) with SMTP ID DSNKUXlTcB0QsoNiq3eeR6VN4yK4EDNVHGu9@postini.com; Thu, 25 Apr 2013 09:01:52 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 4B3471B80DF for <dnsext@ietf.org>; Thu, 25 Apr 2013 09:01:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from webmail.nominum.com (cas-01.win.nominum.com [64.89.228.131]) (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 42442190052; Thu, 25 Apr 2013 09:01:52 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from Ted.Lemon@nominum.com)
Received: from MBX-01.WIN.NOMINUM.COM ([64.89.228.133]) by CAS-01.WIN.NOMINUM.COM ([64.89.228.131]) with mapi id 14.02.0318.004; Thu, 25 Apr 2013 09:01:52 -0700
From: Ted Lemon <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com>
To: Patrik Fältström <paf@frobbit.se>
Thread-Topic: [dnsext] Obsoleting SPF RRTYPE
Thread-Index: AQHOQUvZmmQ2JXTkhEy3ea4oJfG13ZjmnHmAgAAREQCAAMIRgIAACgkAgAAFUoCAABAwgA==
Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2013 16:01:52 +0000
Message-ID: <8D23D4052ABE7A4490E77B1A012B63077515C1B4@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>
In-Reply-To: <14A728AE-83DC-4C1F-A88A-6F988D37F2C7@frobbit.se>
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="iso-8859-1"
Content-ID: <3F0094F7AB7F9D4CBE5B267CC9A73D83@nominum.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: "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 16:01:55 -0000

On Apr 25, 2013, at 11:03 AM, Patrik Fältström <paf@frobbit.se> wrote:
> They know how i feel. We in IETF do believe in rough consensus. I am this time on the rough side.

It seems to be the case that there are rather a lot of people on the dnsext mailing list who are on the rough side of the consensus here.   That suggests that perhaps the consensus isn't in the direction that we are presuming it is.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email