TXT vs SPF record for Google servers SPF record, either or both?

I realize this is a fairly old question, but in case anyone else stumbles upon it, here is what I found. It appears that the SPF record type is now obselete. See:

Studies have shown that RRTYPE 99 has not seen any substantial use, and in fact its existence and mechanism defined in [RFC4408] has led to some interoperability issues. Accordingly, its use is now obsolete, and new implementations are not to use it.

From: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-spfbis-4408bis-15#section-13.1

See also a post on cPanel's feature request forum on this topic.


Please read status of RFC4408 "Category: Experimental" and definition of this status.

Also, from RFC

It is recognized that the current practice (using a TXT record) is not optimal, but it is necessary because there are a number of DNS server and resolver implementations in common use that cannot handle the new RR type.

and, after all, SPF RR haven't any added value, compared to TXT version


I would create both, since you have that ability. After you done, you can send and email to "[email protected]", it will auto-respond and give you a complete diagnosis of the email you sent letting you know, if you have everything set up correctly.

Tags:

Dns