"Barry Leiba" <barryle...@computer.org> wrote: >On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 12:45 AM, SM <s...@resistor.net> wrote: >> At 17:31 13-10-10, Hector Santos wrote: >>>My proposal to add more informative notes to help minimize this for >>>the systems with the lack of DNS admin expertise on board. In >>>particular for those with currently one existing need for a TXT record >>>and that is SPF and incorrectly believe since its a TXT record, adding >>>the DKIM public key data to it will work. >> >> There is an assumption that people managing DNS zones will have a >> basic understanding of DNS. I don't think that the DKIM >> specification should get into badly designed GUIs. > >I agree, more generally, that the DKIM spec can't tell people the >right way to manage their DNS records. DKIM already separates its TXT >records with the "_domainkey" identifier, as SPF does with _spf. If, >given that separation, people still merge the TXT records and whatnot, >that problem's well beyond the scope of our work to fix. > >I appreciate the desire to put more information in there to help, but >we really can't be writing a tutorial on managing DNS records. > >Barry, as participant >
+1. Just as a note of clarification, SPF doesn't prefix TXT records, but I don't think that affects the analysis. Scott K _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
