On Sat, Jul 26, 2008 at 10:12 AM, Neil Schneider <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Brad Beyenhof wrote: > >> A cursory look at those headers seems to show that Google is having a >> hard time accepting the SPF record from Sparky, though whether that's >> Gmail's fault or KPLUG's I can't tell. It could be something as simple >> as Gmail rebuilding its SPF whitelist, which means we'll just have to >> wait for it to iron itself out. On the other hand, if Sparky isn't >> using SPF in a way that Google expects, it'll need to change somehow. > > I wrote the spf record in DNS and this is it. Should it be different? If so, > how and why? > > kernel-panic.org. IN TXT "v=spf1 a ~all"
I don't know much about the implementation details of SPF. However, since the kernel-panic.org MX records (which include both 'sparkplug' and 'sparKPLUG') are authorized to send mail *out* as well as receive it, you may want to add "mx" to the string on the end (e.g. "v=spf1 a mx ~all"). Also, I think there should be a separate SPF record for Sparky as the MX host for the domain. Depending on how the server may identify itself in its HELO, it should be one or both of the following: sparKPLUG.kernel-panic.org. IN TXT "v=spf1 a -all" sparkplug.kernel-panic.org. IN TXT "v=spf1 a -all" (inexpertly researched at <http://www.openspf.org/>) -- Brad Beyenhof . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . http://augmentedfourth.com Have the courage to be ignorant of a great number of things, in order to avoid the calamity of being ignorant of everything. ~ Sydney Smith, English essayist and preacher (1771-1845) -- [email protected] http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
