spf-discuss
[Top] [All Lists]

RE: Update on Broken SPF Records

2005-08-14 08:42:15
Scott K >
MX counts as one.  All that counts are the mechanisms that 
are listed in your record or the ones you include: or redirect=.

So, MX counts, but turning the results into an A
record does not?  (Weird.)
 
I took a quick look at your record.  I expect it can be 
simplified and am willing to help you with that.  Don't give 
up yet.  

I would appreciate such help -- I had a difficult
time getting a record that would never leave out
a legitimate source.

My intention was always to terminate with -all.

It's wimpy to softfail (etc.) the SPF record.

BTW, I don't currently see an SPF record at 
spf.learnquick.com.  That will be a problem.

nslookup -q=txt spf.learnquick.com 68.178.144.167
returns it - and that address is the Primary DNS for
LearnQuick.Com.

My original intention was to transfer the entire SPF
record from LearnQuick.Com -> spf.LearnQuick.Com but
I delayed that due to testing and other issues.

(E.g., it will add a lookup to EVERY other possible
SPF resolution.)

My initial focus on the validator was to make sure only 
compliant records would pass.  I agree it's not an ideal 
troubleshooting tool.  I intend to make it better.

The tool is fine but if it is the closest thing to an
official tool THEN it needs more debug information.

I went through a lot of trouble to check my records against
every (working) validator mentioned on spf.pobox.com and
finally passed all I could find.

Where is this "10 lookup limit" documented? Especially the
rules for counting it...?

As to simplification, there are a couple of "safety"
mechanisms in there, but this protected me recently from
my ISPs change without notice, e.g., :

        Specific IP4: records AND the ptr for the server zone:

          ip4:64.202.167.111 ip4:64.202.189.88/30" 
        ptr:prod.mesa1.secureserver.net

They should be redundant, but for losing mail redundancy
is a "good thing."

The ak.learnquick.com record is temporary, due to a private
mailing list which doesn't re-write the message correctly,
AND that customer dropping an SPF failure.  So my choice
is to (potentially) be blocked from participating with this
customer or have the extra mechanism.

--
Herb


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>