On Mon, 22 Jul 2013, Jason Hellenthal wrote:
It's exactly as it says...
Instead of ... TXT "SPF ..."
You now do
... SPF "SPF ..."
On 22.07.13 11:26, G.W. Haywood wrote:
Caution! The SPF record type is near enough dead. See in particular
RFC6686 paragraph 5.6; paragraph 6.2; and Appendix A point 4.
This was discussed here already, and imho this is anti-spf bullshit like
all those "spf breaks forwarding" FUD. The SPF RR is already here and is
preferred over TXT that is generik RR type, unlike SPF.
--
Matus UHLAR - fantomas, uh...@fantomas.sk ; http://www.fantomas.sk/
Warning: I wish NOT to receive e-mail advertising to this address.
Varovanie: na tuto adresu chcem NEDOSTAVAT akukolvek reklamnu postu.
Emacs is a complicated operating system without good text editor.
_______________________________________________
Please visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users to unsubscribe
from this list
bind-users mailing list
bind-users@lists.isc.org
https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users
