spf ent txt records.

[Sten Carlsen]

I used both types with Bind 9.2.1, so both types should work for you.
As I recall the only difference was txt -> spf as RR type.


hugo hugoo <hugobxl at hotmail.com> wrote:

>Dear all,
> 
>I received the following question and I am not able to aswer as spf
>records are still mysterious to me.
>We are using BIND 9.7.
> 
>Thanks in advance for your answers,
> 
>Hugo,
> 
> 
> 
>Does our DNS-server support SPF-type records? Or do we put SPF-info in
>a TXT-record?
> 
>Ref. : 
>Early implementations used TXT records for implementation before the
>new record type was commonly available in DNS software. Use of TXT
>records for SPF was intended as a transitional mechanism. However,
>according to the current RFC, RFC 4408, section 3.1.1, "An
>SPF-compliant domain name SHOULD have SPF records of both RR types. A
>compliant domain name MUST have a record of at least one type," and as
>such, TXT record use is not deprecated.[2]
>  		 	   		  
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>_______________________________________________
>Please visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users to
>unsubscribe from this list
>
>bind-users mailing list
>bind-users at lists.isc.org
>https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users

-- 
Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.isc.org/pipermail/bind-users/attachments/20130313/95340ae3/attachment.html>