spf ent txt records.

Noel Butler noel.butler at ausics.net
Tue Mar 19 02:53:34 UTC 2013

On Mon, 2013-03-18 at 16:52 -0700, SM wrote:

> SPF RR type

Had a bit of a read of that thread, and the most noise comes from a guy
who should know better, but doesn't, Mr Kitterman repeatedly says  "If
it's all so obvious that it makes sense to publish SPF records, why
aren't more people doing it? "

The answer is simple, and he knows it, very few system admins know or
care about which specific RFC covers what, they hear things, it gains
momentum, like googling for anti spam, stop spoofing, stuff like that,
Ohhh they say, 'nice, I'll check that out' they load google    "create
an SPF record"
Now google shows me as of 60 seconds ago,  first five entries using only
TXT RR's as examples
(at lucky number 6 it shows me someone saying to use SPF RR)   So, new
-to-spf adminy type, fires up vi, pico, whatever... adds it, it works!
yay they say, they spread the word, " adminy2 says" nice how did you do
it" adminy1 shows adminy2 copies, and its just like life, the cycle
repeats over and over and...

Secondly, Mr Kitterman, as a debian packager, would be highly aware of
how many "deprecated" versions of debian are out there running resolvers
that do not understand SPF and have not been supported by any upstream
in ten years, and, I'm sure that is also probably true of early RHEL's
as well.

Back in the dark ages, I learned about SPF from word-of-mouth too, like
most here I'm sure, and if WOM shows you one way, thats the way you do
it, lets face it, you discover a new method, you dont go rushing to rfc
website to read all about it, I have only been doing SPF RR's since
hrmm, maybe 4 years back? not sure, too long ago, but have used TXT
since, it started to get bandied around the sendmail newsgroup some
ancient time ago.

I found out about the existence of SPF RR type, from this very list,
how many subscribers to this list? 1500 odd, how many sys admins world
wide? hundred thousand plus maybe, how many are even aware of the SPF
RR? probably not that many, I recently discovered that a 'drinks
session' out of 9 sys admins, myself and ONE other were even aware of
the SRV RR type. Not all corporations/SP's/ASP's or ISP's,  have
dedicated DNS admins who can concentrate full time on all things DNS,
I'm not a full time DNS admin, since it works nicely and doesnt occupy
all my time :)

Many of the domain parking organisations are just as guilty, even up
until two years ago, I used zoneedit for my personal DNS, and they did
not have an option for SPF, I hounded them for a couple of months before
they eventually replied saying, no intentions, so how many others also
did not offer it.

So, there are a myriad of reasons as to why the SPF RR type 99 never
"took of"

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.isc.org/pipermail/bind-users/attachments/20130319/9b0f50df/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: face-smile.png
Type: image/png
Size: 873 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.isc.org/pipermail/bind-users/attachments/20130319/9b0f50df/attachment.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 490 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <https://lists.isc.org/pipermail/bind-users/attachments/20130319/9b0f50df/attachment.bin>

More information about the bind-users mailing list