At 3:33 PM 1/10/06, JC Dill wrote:
Received: from mail.pshift.com (MAIL.pshift.com [63.166.217.30]) by
f05n16.cac.psu.edu (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id k0AGdvkw098116 for
          <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Tue, 10 Jan 2006 11:39:57 -0500
Received: from mungedusername (unverified [64.30.34.237]) by mail.pshift.com
          (Vircom SMTPRS 4.2.425.24) with SMTP id
          <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Tue, 10 Jan 2006 11:39:41 -0500
Received-SPF: softfail (mail.pshift.com: domain of transitioning
              [EMAIL PROTECTED] does not designate 64.30.34.237 as
              permitted sender)
X-Modus-BlackList: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

I don't know that much about SPF - I was wondering if anyone else has
encountered this and if this is working correctly?

No, this is not working correctly. The folks at pshift.com are morons. The SPF check, done by their own server, on mail received from their client, is failing.

Their published SPF record is
v=spf1 mx ip4:63.166.217.0/24 ip4:198.68.168.0/24 ip4:216.57.116.64 ~all

That tells the world that mail claiming to be from pshift.com should be delivered by a server in one of those IP ranges. And in this case, the mail delivered to psu.edu from pshit's server at 63.166.217.30 would pass an SPF check, if psu bothered to check it, since it's in the 63.166.217.0/24 range. But the check isn't being done by psu. It's being done by pshit's server when it receives the mail from the client. They shouldn't be SPF-checking within their own network.

Could SPF settings
be causing messages like this to be classified as spam and if so to then
result in messages from the list being classified as spam?

It shouldn't. The SPF failure didn't occur on a message FROM the list. It was on a message from the individual subscriber TO the list. When mail is received FROM the list, if the receiving server does SPF checking, they should check the sending server's IP address (which would presumably be somewhere at psu.edu) against any published SPF information for lists.psu.edu. And, since psu.edu doesn't publish any SPF information, no server in the world should SPF-fail any of their mail.

However, based on this, and from the message posted from the subscriber about her discussion with pshit's chief of IT, it's obvious that they shouldn't be in the ISP business. There's no telling what other moronic stuff they might be doing with the mail when it gets back to them.

Reply via email to