spf ent txt records.

Sten Carlsen stenc at s-carlsen.dk
Wed Mar 13 11:40:29 UTC 2013

I used both types with Bind 9.2.1, so both types should work for you.
As I recall the only difference was txt -> spf as RR type.

hugo hugoo <hugobxl at hotmail.com> wrote:

>Dear all,
>I received the following question and I am not able to aswer as spf
>records are still mysterious to me.
>We are using BIND 9.7.
>Thanks in advance for your answers,
>Does our DNS-server support SPF-type records? Or do we put SPF-info in
>a TXT-record?
>Ref. : 
>Early implementations used TXT records for implementation before the
>new record type was commonly available in DNS software. Use of TXT
>records for SPF was intended as a transitional mechanism. However,
>according to the current RFC, RFC 4408, section 3.1.1, "An
>SPF-compliant domain name SHOULD have SPF records of both RR types. A
>compliant domain name MUST have a record of at least one type," and as
>such, TXT record use is not deprecated.[2]
>Please visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users to
>unsubscribe from this list
>bind-users mailing list
>bind-users at lists.isc.org

Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.isc.org/pipermail/bind-users/attachments/20130313/95340ae3/attachment.html>

More information about the bind-users mailing list