--"Stuart D. Gathman" <stuart(_at_)bmsi(_dot_)com> wrote:
The MX records for expofreight.com are as follows:
$ host -t mx expofreight.com
expofreight.com mail is handled by 30 dmss2.webindia.com.
expofreight.com mail is handled by 10 61.16.173.99.
expofreight.com mail is handled by 15 dmssdummy2.webindia.com.
expofreight.com mail is handled by 20 dmss.webindia.com.
Should mail sent from 61.16.173.99 match the SPF MX mechanism? Would
mail clients use the numeric MX? If the first answer is yes, is this
case included in the SPF test suite? :-)
I don't think that is a valid scenario. MX records are supposed to be
names, and that name doesn't exist (and won't until 99 becomes the proper
country code for 99ania). It is the MX record that is in error.
In my opinion, proper behavior is for the +mx check in SPF to ignore MX
records that don't resolve to a name.
--
Greg Connor <gconnor(_at_)nekodojo(_dot_)org>