SPF RR type

Nicholas F Miller nicholas.miller at Colorado.EDU
Thu Jun 5 14:25:17 UTC 2014

Are SPF RR types finally dead or not? I’ve read through rfc7208 it appears that they are:

   "SPF records MUST be published as a DNS TXT (type 16) Resource Record
   (RR) [RFC1035] only.  The character content of the record is encoded
   as [US-ASCII].  Use of alternative DNS RR types was supported in
   SPF's experimental phase but has been discontinued."

...but to confuse the issue rfc7208 goes on to say:

   "If a future update to SPF were developed that did not
   reuse existing SPF records, it could use the SPF RR type.  SPF's use
   of the TXT RR type for structured data should in no way be taken as
   precedent for future protocol designers.”

Bind-9.10.0-P1 still reports errors if you don’t have SPF RRs defined with the SPF TXT records or are not using 'check-spf ignore’.  Should one keep existing SPF RRs or remove them? Will future versions of bind stop reporting errors when SPF RRs don’t exist?
Nicholas Miller, OIT, University of Colorado at Boulder

More information about the bind-users mailing list