spf ent txt records.

[John Levine]

>It is or would have been, very little cost to publish SPF records.

Not until we fix the provisioning problem.  (News flash: in 99.9% of
the Internet, people do not edit master files with vi.)

In the early days of SPF, it was remarkably hard to get TXT records
provisioned, even though TXT records have been part of the DNS since
the beginning.  People had to go to their hosting companies, and the
places that produce the web software they use, and persuade them to
handle TXT, since in most cases it's just A, MX, and maybe CNAME.

Having gone through that pain, nobody has any interest in going
through it again for new rrtypes.  I can assure you that the vast
majority of the provisioning software that people use handles only a
small subset of existing defined rrtypes.

I have a draft about a DNS master file extension language with the
goal being that DNS servers and particularly provisioning software can
be updated by adding lines to configuration files rather than by
rewriting code.  Vixie (now a co-author) had the clever idea of
publishing the config info in a well known place in the DNS so the
configuration can be automatic.

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-levine-dnsextlang/