> host -t txt example.com
> "v=spf1 redirect=_spf.example.com -all"
> host -t _spf.example.com
> "v=spf1 +all"
Redirect makes it a replacement for the record, so +all
> host -t txt example.net
> "v=spf1 -include=_spf.example.net +all"
> host -t _spf.example.net
> "v=spf1 ~all"
-include is not a
On Sat, 2024-10-12 at 15:59 +, Louis via mailop wrote:
> > host -t txt example.com
> > "v=spf1 redirect=_spf.example.com -all"
> > host -t _spf.example.com
> > "v=spf1 +all"
> Redirect makes it a replacement for the record, so +all
>
Not according to RFC 7208. Section 6.1 ends:
===
Any "redi
> On 11.10.2024 at 23:02 Mark E. Mallett via mailop wrote:
>
> On Fri, Oct 11, 2024 at 04:20:23PM +, Dave Crocker via mailop wrote:
>>> On 10/11/2024 12:49 AM, Matus UHLAR - fantomas via mailop wrote:
>>> Yes, SPF has drawbacks. But it is still trivial to implement and makes
>>> DMARC easie