Skip to main content

Real SPF record not as a TXT

TraderStf
Hello, Is it possible to add a real SPF record? Perhaps with a text editor based on the existing TXT-SPF, not directly from cPanel. It is not the one defined in a TXT record. Take a look at this explanation:

Comments

13 comments

Date Votes
  • Infopro
    Are you having an issue adding this via your cPanel?
    0
  • TraderStf
    Unless I am mistaken, you can not add a REAL SPF. SPF is not in the drop down menu, you have A, CNAME... SVR..TXT.. not SPF. Thank you.
    0
  • cPanelMichael
    Hello :) I found the following URL to help explain why TXT records are used: HOWTO - Define an SPF Record Thank you.
    0
  • MarkerB
    [quote="cPanelMichael, post: 1583481">Hello :) I found the following URL to help explain why TXT records are used: HOWTO - Define an SPF Record Thank you.
    The original poster's question is still valid, and it's something I've also been wondering for some time. I thought cPanel was just taking a little longer to implement; but didn't think until now they might be entirely ignoring the specification. The use of TXT records for SPF information was meant for transitional use, and by now many SPF validation tools report a warning if a real SPF record is not available. Is cPanel specifically choosing to not support native Sender Policy Framework records many years after it was implemented?
    0
  • cPanelMichael
    A feature request was opened for the inclusion of a direct SPF record (instead of a TXT entry) and here is the response sent: [QUOTE] Kenneth Power Posted 5 months ago For SPF, the TXT RR should be used. SPF records are deprecated by the IETF and not recommended for use. Please see [url=http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-20#page-12]draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-20 - Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1 and [url=http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-20#section-13.1]draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-20 - Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1 DKIM keys longer than 2048 bits must be split into multiple fields. This is a limitation of the spec for TXT records.
    0
  • Skin
    Subscribed
    0
  • cPanelMichael
    [quote="Skin, post: 1653111">Subscribed
    Could you confirm what you are seeking an update on? Thank you.
    0
  • ateks
    [quote="cPanelMichael, post: 1653222">Could you confirm what you are seeking an update on? Thank you.
    I believe this is in response to the OP's question. I too would like to know if this is being looked at. The post regarding deprecation is old and the IETF specifies that both an SPF and TXT record are recommended (see RFC 4408 Section 3.1.1 which specifies that domains "SHOULD have SPF records of both RR types"). Indeed, many mail engines do not even issue an SPF pass unless a true SPF record has been published. Feel free to argue that this is bad practice (and I wouldn't disagree) but it doesn't change anything; true SPF records ARE important. In recent months, I've noticed the number of mail engines requiring a true SPF record increasing. From my latest experiences over the last week, even Gmail does not always issue an SPF pass without a true SPF record.
    0
  • cPanelMichael
    Please ensure you add that response to the following feature request: [url=http://features.cpanel.net/responses/spf-record-field-needed-in-the-dropdown]SPF Record field needed in the dropdown | cPanel Feature Requests It's under discussion there with a staff response as recent as a week ago. Thank you.
    0
  • ateks
    Thanks. I would do but comments have been locked on that page.
    0
  • cPanelMichael
    I do want to point out the most recent comment: [QUOTE] cPanelDon Posted 1 week ago The DNS TXT resource record type facilitates valid SPF records. Using the DNS SPF RR type is not recommended nor required for publishing valid SPF records. Section 3.1 of RFC 7208 states "SPF records MUST be published as a DNS TXT (type 16) Resource Record (RR) [RFC1035] only. The character content of the record is encoded as [US-ASCII]. Use of alternative DNS RR types was supported in SPF's experimental phase but has been discontinued." Reference: [url=http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7208#section-3.1]RFC 7208 - Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1
    I'll try to get that request opened again so you can add additional feedback. Thanks.
    0
  • JacobPerkins
    [quote="cPanelMichael, post: 1668872">I do want to point out the most recent comment: I'll try to get that request opened again so you can add additional feedback. Thanks.
    This is what I get from it was well. RFC 4408 was made obselete by RFC 7208 April of this year. [url=http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7208]RFC 7208 - Sender Policy Framework (SPF) for Authorizing Use of Domains in Email, Version 1 Specifically section 3.1. DNS Resource Records
    0
  • Infopro
    Comments have been unlocked.
    0

Please sign in to leave a comment.

Didn't find what you were looking for?

New post