SPF/TXT records

[Mike Bernhardt]

So is the general recommendation in this group to NOT implement an empty
SPF2.0 record (i.e., "spf2.0/pra") just in case, as recommended in the
5-year-old openspf document referenced below?

-----Original Message-----
From: Matus UHLAR - fantomas [mailto:uhlar at fantomas.sk] 
Sent: Friday, June 19, 2009 12:31 AM
To: bind-users at lists.isc.org
Subject: Re: SPF/TXT records

On 18.06.09 16:22, Jeffrey Collyer wrote:
> M$ has their own take on SPF called Sender ID, which uses a very similar  
> record -
>
> "v=spf2.0" rather than "v=spf1"
>
> so be sure to read up on them both before publishing records for one or  
> the other.

It has downfalls so I recommend not even studying it, just remember that
"spf2" is some M$ crap...

v=spf1 is just enough for now.

> http://www.openspf.org/SPF_vs_Sender_ID
>
> Hotmail in particular is picky about what it rejects and why.

Yes, hotmail uses to reject mail for many strange reasons.

But I don't recommend playing with spf2 just to get mail to hotmail, I think
there are better ways to get your mail anywhere.

-- 
Matus UHLAR - fantomas, uhlar at 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.
My mind is like a steel trap - rusty and illegal in 37 states.