Why "+mx", "+" is already explicit, right?
(not that it makes any difference ...)
On Wed, 16 Mar 2005, Todd Herr wrote:
So, just so I'm clear on things here...
Would the following be an acceptable SPF record for rr.com?
"v=spf1 ip4:24.30.203.0/24 ip4:24.28.200.0/24 \
ip4:24.28.204.0/24 ip4:24.30.218.0/24 \
ip4:24.93.47.0/24 ip4:24.25.9.0/24 \
ip4:65.24.5.0/24 ip4:24.94.166.0/24 \
ip4:24.29.109.0/24 ip4:66.75.162.0/24 \
ip4:24.24.2.0/24 ip4:65.32.5.0/24 +mx ~all"
Acceptable, that is, from the standpoint of fewer than 10 methods
and guarding against the forged @rr.com sender that Radu spoke of
upthread?