Ralf Doeblitz wrote:
--On Montag, Dezember 26, 2005 01:58:29 -0800 David Gravereaux
<davygrvy(_at_)pobox(_dot_)com> wrote:
Hi,
First, I love SPF. It works great for catching and discarding forgeries
that are common place these days with spammers.
http://www.dnsstuff.com/tools/spf.ch?server=davygrvy%40pobox.com&ip=192.1
68.0.1
The first string is right, but the second is not. My custom string is
"v=spf1 include:freenode.net -all". I don't where/how the tester is
finding "v=spf1 ?all". I used to get 'fail', now it returns 'NEUTRAL'.
Pobox's SPF implementation has been broken for at least a month.
[doeblitz(_at_)pts/7:1007] ~ % dig davygrvy._at_.pobox.com._spf.pobox.com TXT
;; ANSWER SECTION:
davygrvy._at_.pobox.com._spf.pobox.com. 60 IN TXT "v=spf1 ?all"
Maybe POBOX tries to avoid the non-existant freenode.net-SPF-RR, I got
no matching records for TXT or SPF queries.
Ralf Döblitz
Thanks Ralf,
You got me pointing in the right direction. It is, in fact, a pobox.com
problem. Their DNS entry is just plain wrong and not what I set it to
be in the pobox config.
You'd think that Meng Wong's company could have gotten their own
implementation correct.
-------
Sender Policy Framework: http://www.openspf.org/
Archives at http://archives.listbox.com/spf-discuss/current/
To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your
subscription,
please go to
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=spf-discuss(_at_)v2(_dot_)listbox(_dot_)com