IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dnsext] Obsoleting SPF RRTYPE

Joe Abley <jabley@hopcount.ca> Thu, 25 April 2013 16:54 UTC

Return-Path: <jabley@hopcount.ca>
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 1F9DC21F925B for <dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 25 Apr 2013 09:54:39 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, 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 0Kw+FyNMrb3h for <dnsext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 25 Apr 2013 09:54:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ie0-x232.google.com (mail-ie0-x232.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c03::232]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7167521F8B07 for <dnsext@ietf.org>; Thu, 25 Apr 2013 09:54:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ie0-f178.google.com with SMTP id aq17so3968747iec.9 for <dnsext@ietf.org>; Thu, 25 Apr 2013 09:54:26 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hopcount.ca; s=google; h=x-received:content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date :cc:content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to:x-mailer; bh=36j/KS3McVEurT5t24Y3uaS7R4e4lHRWFyfbGSDaLuU=; b=A/jFkbh4QrHYE6pkaFswI62sWH4bEc4dC+Gv1Me6XDHql/u4hkwYL7sD4kNChfa0Cb SXcbpODOSqyVD5bh2u4tb0UOFAmZ7LflCo/PxmIZJZxxjZ4jseBNdaNLi+BjX2vgT5kO PKhM50XJtFwlpmzQpYzZdecEtryXVSMslylkY=
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=x-received:content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date :cc:content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to:x-mailer :x-gm-message-state; bh=36j/KS3McVEurT5t24Y3uaS7R4e4lHRWFyfbGSDaLuU=; b=VTiE2wOOW/WEyK5x/4zCI3ZiQ3NXiEqyymGNY6BGhlSQpYVPXNO53RFqSDpG6rLmnC BijgWRy3UeVV2WO9m4n3G1QBjnaM6AMvci76sZKV7Ief4lJ+W5xTWAPgYrHOC4lhPWk/ g4zvdcjZnd7/dVhSsw+WTyi9gZg9o2UG2zYExFGPHY+lGYQ2Hr2kkxvsAZn3FgKqeF8g GY5d70+5ig4EQEctI6OVifiNe1wgJd5QVaInCp5DRrvhq2ohiEz6/qlezexhiymbEcA7 t0RA1uxbPNOq6kcqobrGRukd5q48Fs5zhOJCj69tfpGi7XptwyUad6zcyVYE79NYp9+n HQ0g==
X-Received: by 10.50.62.66 with SMTP id w2mr18136168igr.81.1366908866262; Thu, 25 Apr 2013 09:54:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.105.67.31] ([75.98.19.132]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id hi4sm13649348igc.6.2013.04.25.09.54.23 for <multiple recipients> (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Thu, 25 Apr 2013 09:54:25 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.3 \(1503\))
From: Joe Abley <jabley@hopcount.ca>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1304251030380.65043@joyce.lan>
Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2013 12:54:20 -0400
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <DCFABEF3-2AC1-49D2-8E2E-69A1B2A1CAC7@hopcount.ca>
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>
To: John R Levine <johnl@taugh.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1503)
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmnZuc5e8D9Ys2nyTUr86ANv597v3aXyzmUCa9AM3wCY115FJ3n1sc6KmNktIbop7+GHNnq
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 16:54:39 -0000

On 2013-04-25, at 10:44, John R Levine <johnl@taugh.com> wrote:

> The much more serious reason is that the provisioning systems to let system managers install type 99 records into their DNS did not exist, and for the most part still do not exist.  I know a lot of the people who did early SPF installations and they uniformly reported that even getting the provisioning software to support TXT records that have been around since the dawn of the DNS was painful, and there would have been no hope for a new and exotic record type.

Wait; support for the SPF RRType would have involved changes in provisioning systems, so instead the decision was to use TXT RRTypes which involved changes in provisioning systems?

Awesome. :-)


Joe

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email