IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [spfbis] The RRTYPE topic

Scott Kitterman <spf2@kitterman.com> Sat, 01 June 2013 04:55 UTC

Return-Path: <spf2@kitterman.com>
X-Original-To: spfbis@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: spfbis@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 215A121F8E6E for <spfbis@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 31 May 2013 21:55:56 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599]
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 g+M3CXv1XfJw for <spfbis@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 31 May 2013 21:55:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mailout02.controlledmail.com (mailout02.controlledmail.com [72.81.252.18]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B17821F89A6 for <spfbis@ietf.org>; Fri, 31 May 2013 21:55:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mailout02.controlledmail.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailout02.controlledmail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B224C20E40CF; Sat, 1 Jun 2013 00:55:49 -0400 (EDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=kitterman.com; s=2007-00; t=1370062549; bh=OwejzjadMQHsj/svGhlyvSNiSx3eJIS8UxZHXGTbj28=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=c9sb59fuX9b1e+AbXiBW812tIWwPefXG4PlEUJ2QBopdsP8NaxjAja1uqhQMoJvYB I0ZqhVwWKCwm9fiOA9Elm8k/ipcwOabJK29lBZ7+l4p78uShx2GuVPvE1TDM1b3ST8 YKvf0jtP/JInLYgNJ6ka3CvXWtfJhmSRGf9TZc50=
Received: from scott-latitude-e6320.localnet (static-72-81-252-21.bltmmd.fios.verizon.net [72.81.252.21]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mailout02.controlledmail.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9465720E40BE; Sat, 1 Jun 2013 00:55:49 -0400 (EDT)
From: Scott Kitterman <spf2@kitterman.com>
To: spfbis@ietf.org
Date: Sat, 01 Jun 2013 00:55:48 -0400
Message-ID: <2100860.3TqLYcDuTr@scott-latitude-e6320>
User-Agent: KMail/4.10.3 (Linux/3.8.0-23-generic; KDE/4.10.3; i686; ; )
In-Reply-To: <51A97D69.9040606@gathman.org>
References: <A022755E-F8B8-4C82-9F1C-73B8585193BF@gmail.com> <15249245-ac39-483f-93e6-c0b274c69ed2@email.android.com> <51A97D69.9040606@gathman.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
X-AV-Checked: ClamAV using ClamSMTP
Subject: Re: [spfbis] The RRTYPE topic
X-BeenThere: spfbis@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: SPFbis discussion list <spfbis.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/spfbis>, <mailto:spfbis-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/spfbis>
List-Post: <mailto:spfbis@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:spfbis-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spfbis>, <mailto:spfbis-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 01 Jun 2013 04:55:56 -0000

On Saturday, June 01, 2013 12:49:45 AM Stuart Gathman wrote:
> Long ago, Nostradamus foresaw that on 05/30/2013 01:21 PM, Scott
> 
> Kitterman would write:
> > Stuart D Gathman <stuart@gathman.org> wrote:
> >> +1
> >> 
> >> 4408bis makes a provision to endorse caching negative and error results
> >> 
> >> for up to 24 hours.  *That* (not throwing away the SPF record) is the
> >> solution to the broken nameserver problem.  When you query SPF, and the
> >> 
> >> request times out due to broken firewalls, broken nameserver, or
> >> whatever, then cache the result.
> > 
> > Took out what I think you're referring to due to negative WGLC comments. 
> > See -15.> 
> >> If anything, it is time to remove the dual publishing (both TXT and
> >> SPF), and the administration/consistency problems that causes.
> > 
> > The current draft does that.
> 
> It says MUST publish TXT - so if you publish SPF you must publish both.
> 
> It could allow caching negative results for type SPF queries only.

Since the current draft removes type SPF, there's no dual publishing needed.

Scott K

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email