To:
Paul Wouters <paul@xelerance.com>
Cc:
Roy Arends <roy@dnss.ec>, dnssec@cafax.se
From:
Ben Laurie <ben@algroup.co.uk>
Date:
Mon, 21 Jun 2004 16:10:01 +0100
In-Reply-To:
<Pine.LNX.4.44.0406211541300.5274-100000@expansionpack.xtdnet.nl>
Sender:
owner-dnssec@cafax.se
User-Agent:
Mozilla Thunderbird 0.6 (Windows/20040502)
Subject:
Re: continued: rrsig(qtype)
Paul Wouters wrote: > Anything not getting DNSSEC into an RFC is a problem. Postponing DNSSEC for > another year by fixing this corner case of abuse is going to give me a LOT > more spam then the amount of spam I would get when DNSSEC is deployed and > people can start using things like SPF records. Why is DNSSEC required for SPF? -- http://www.apache-ssl.org/ben.html http://www.thebunker.net/ "There is no limit to what a man can do or how far he can go if he doesn't mind who gets the credit." - Robert Woodruff