On 21 Oct 2015, at 13:48, btb wrote:
are spf records allowed to be a cname?
I can't see any reason why they shouldn't be...
e.g.: http://dpaste.com/0MR0R3C.txt is this explicitly addressed in an rfc?
I don't believe so and there's no reason to. CNAME records trump all DNS record types for a name so it may be usually unwise to have a CNAME record for a name that is used in email address domain parts, but it isn't inherently wrong.
A name which is resolved by a CNAME record to a canonical name is forbidden as the result in MX and NS records to prevent resolution loops. That rationally SHOULD be banned for CNAME records as well, but we're decades past the time to argue that.
