Re: [spfbis] Proposed spf TXT record change

Mark Andrews <marka@isc.org> Wed, 10 February 2016 00:36 UTC

Return-Path: <marka@isc.org>
X-Original-To: spfbis@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: spfbis@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 246FE1B32F5 for <spfbis@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 9 Feb 2016 16:36:14 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.902
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.902 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id P7A4e7VnMZfj for <spfbis@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 9 Feb 2016 16:36:12 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mx.ams1.isc.org (mx.ams1.isc.org [IPv6:2001:500:60::65]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 940C21B32F1 for <spfbis@ietf.org>; Tue, 9 Feb 2016 16:36:12 -0800 (PST)
Received: from zmx1.isc.org (zmx1.isc.org [149.20.0.20]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx.ams1.isc.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3933F1FCAE7; Wed, 10 Feb 2016 00:36:09 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from zmx1.isc.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by zmx1.isc.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1A2D5160047; Wed, 10 Feb 2016 00:36:08 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by zmx1.isc.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 09D331600A5; Wed, 10 Feb 2016 00:36:08 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from zmx1.isc.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (zmx1.isc.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id vfj5cbnFgWbJ; Wed, 10 Feb 2016 00:36:07 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from rock.dv.isc.org (c110-21-49-25.carlnfd1.nsw.optusnet.com.au [110.21.49.25]) by zmx1.isc.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id BE208160047; Wed, 10 Feb 2016 00:36:07 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from rock.dv.isc.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rock.dv.isc.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A90F41C28F6; Wed, 10 Feb 2016 11:36:05 +1100 (EST)
To: "Roy A. Gilmore" <rag@ragged-software.com>
From: Mark Andrews <marka@isc.org>
References: <56BA775B.9050109@ragged-software.com>
In-reply-to: Your message of "Tue, 09 Feb 2016 15:33:47 -0800." <56BA775B.9050109@ragged-software.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2016 11:36:05 +1100
Message-Id: <20160210003605.9A90F41C28F6@rock.dv.isc.org>
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/spfbis/cBH1htBQZOJKiw4VE7qnLVnr-mg>
Cc: spfbis@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [spfbis] Proposed spf TXT record change
X-BeenThere: spfbis@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Wed, 10 Feb 2016 00:36:14 -0000

In message <56BA775B.9050109@ragged-software.com>;, "Roy A. Gilmore" writes:
> I'm not sure how to go about this, but, I'll start here and maybe
> somebody could point me in the right direction. I think placing the spf
> information in a TXT record directly attached to the domain is a
> mistake. I think the spf information should be placed in a TXT record
> attached to a _spf selector (e.g. _spf.example.com). This behavior
> already has a history of being used by other services (i.e.
> _kerberos.example.com, _dmarc.example.com, etc.), and would make
> retrieving the spf information much easier and much more robust. This
> would also be a trivial change to implement. Any thoughts?

This group won't allow the double query and will introduce spurious
interoperablity arguments.  See the history of the SPF record type
which if the group hadn't abandoned would be well on the way to
being done by now as they abandoned the process just as the libraries
using the new code point were being deployed.

> _______________________________________________
> spfbis mailing list
> spfbis@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spfbis
-- 
Mark Andrews, ISC
1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742                 INTERNET: marka@isc.org