Astro Hacker News - SPF Record Syntax: Mechanisms, Qualifiers, Modifiers, and Macros

jedberg |next [-]

I'm sorry this page needs to exist, it's partly my fault. I created the first "large scale" SPF record (for eBay and PayPal), and agreed that this was the best way to do it. I guess the people after me agreed too, because 20 years later it's still pretty much the same shape as when I made it!

But I don't have any regrets, the format was pretty straightforward and offered a lot of flexibility. The biggest issue was the parsing libraries handling all of the "include" statements correctly.

trollbridge |root |parent |next [-]

Eh, SPF is one of the few things I don't hate about modern e-mail. Pretty easy to figure out / tweak / parse. I like dealing with it way more than MTA-STS.

|root |parent |previous [-]

YesThatTom2 |next |previous [-]

SPF flattening is difficult to get correct and then you have to check it every so often to update it.

DNSControl automates this. https://docs.dnscontrol.org/language-reference/domain-modifi...

(It’s open source)

dan_sbl |previous [-]

> SPF record syntax follows one shape:

The first six words do not scream "human written" to me.

trollbridge |root |parent |next [-]

Comes up 99% AI-generated on Pangram.

ddevnyc |root |parent |next |previous [-]

The overall structure of the document is no different than any other tech reference or RFC that I've read over the decades

kronk |root |parent [-]

True. It's a 25 minute read instead of 1hr+

TZubiri |root |parent |next |previous [-]

I could tell before opening the link, but the pill tags and neon color palette are also a huge signal.

ksajadi |root |parent |previous [-]

That’s obvious. But a genuine question: why does it matter? This seems to be a detailed reference document for a very technical purpose (and SEO juice for the company I guess).

teddyh |root |parent [-]

If that’s what you want, you would be better served by RFC 7208: <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7208/>