Ben Lentz wrote: > The message is sent from [EMAIL PROTECTED] to > [EMAIL PROTECTED] but shows up with no SPF information. Are > you saying that the SPF > records are supposed to be published along with the sending mail > server's A record instead of with the domain? Like if the MX for > channing-bete.com was smtp.channing-bete.com, then the SPF record > should > be returned from "dig smtp.channing-bete.com txt" and not "dig > channing-bete.com txt"? This seems quite off from how gmail, yahoo, > aol, microsoft, etc systems are publishing their records. So who's > right? Did the draft standard change? ... > Received: from wproxy.gmail.com (wproxy.gmail.com [64.233.184.194]) > by smtp.channing-bete.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id j8SNUEcu009571 > for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Wed, 28 Sep 2005 19:30:14 -0400 ... > Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
SPF has NOTHING to do with the HELO/EHLO info. It has everything to do with the "envelope sender" - that is, the MAIL FROM <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - and the connecting IP address. In this case, the envelope sender was [EMAIL PROTECTED], so the relevant SPF record is returned from "dig gmail.com txt" -- to wit, "v=spf1 a:mproxy.gmail.com a:rproxy.gmail.com a:wproxy.gmail.com a:zproxy.gmail.com a:nproxy.gmail.com a:xproxy.gmail.com a:qproxy.gmail.com ?all" In this case, since you received the message from wproxy.gmail.com [64.233.184.194] (the IP checks out), this should have SPF PASS. This assumes your trusted_network stuff is correct, and that smtp.channing-bete.com in particular is understood to be part of your "internal network." -- Matthew.van.Eerde (at) hbinc.com 805.964.4554 x902 Hispanic Business Inc./HireDiversity.com Software Engineer
