Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-19.txt> (Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1) to Proposed Standard

[Phillip Hallam-Baker <[e-mail]>]

On Mon, Sep 2, 2013 at 9:56 AM, David Conrad <[e-mail]> wrote:

> John,
>
> > Either that or figure out how to make it easy enough to deploy new
> > RRTYPEs that people are willing to do so.
> >
> > The type number is 16 bits, after all.  We're not in any danger of
> running out.
>
> We have been told on numerous occasions that one of the primary reasons
> for continued use of TXT is because middleboxes, etc., do not allow new RR
> types (something deprecation of the SPF RR would seem to only encourage).
> The number of bits in the type field would not seem to be particularly
> relevant to this.
>
> Regards,
> -drc
>


Which is a problem that I think can only be solved if there is a general
solution of the policy distribution problem and an expectation that at
least new middle boxen will support it.

I have been pushing for some sort of 'Internet 2.0' branding for equipment
that meets a comprehensive set of nextgen needs, i.e. IPv6, port
forwarding, DNSSEC, border policy enforcement for that very reason.


But it has to be a two way street. The reason DNS Choices fell flat is that
it just told people what not to do to solve their problems, it did not
provide a proposal that actually solved their problems.


-- 
Website: http://hallambaker.com/