
spfdiscuss at alandoherty
Dec 2, 2010, 1:11 PM
Post #32 of 51
(3694 views)
Permalink
|
|
Re: How to set up spf for my client/server situation
[In reply to]
|
|
At 18:29 02/12/2010 Thursday, Marc Olivé wrote: >Hi, > >Let me please join your conversation in the "asking" part of it. > >Andrew, you introduce an interesting question to me: > >"If, for example, you hired a marketing company to send communications to your customers. If they sent emails from their servers as you, one option would be to add their servers to your SPF record. (There are other, often better solutions for this.)" > > >Recently, I've recommended a client of us (we are a small web agency offering e-mail marketing solutions) to add our server's ip4 to their SPF record. > >Could you suggest a better solution for that case? They send mail to a legitimate list of their customers and interested people, no spamming. They send mail from the servers behind their domain, and we send mail on their behalf from a server we manage. a common solution is to publish v=spf1 ip4:myip1 ip4:myip2 etc... ?include:spfrecord-of-esp -all thus my own ips have a default + pass the esp who sends mail 'forged as me' but not under my control entirely lists their ip's in an spf record they control {so they can move servers without breaking clients) and i include it wit a ? to say its not me but its not forged treat neutrally, then all others are a - or ~ fail depending on my userbase another is to do per user spf v=spf1 redirect=%{l}._spf1.%{d2} ie lookup localpart._spf1.domain for this users apf so my-esp-from-address [at] mydomai has an spf of v=spf1 include:spfrecord-of-esp -all and me [at] mydomai has an spf of v=spf1 ip4:myip1 ip4:myip2 etc... -all and address-that-dosnt-exist [at] mydomai has an spf of v=spf1 -all the former is common the latter is my preferred solution, but needs a compitent and diligent admin >We are completely open to any comment that may help mail filters and handlers correctly qualify our messages. > >Regards, > >Marc Olivé i Valls >El Nucli >________________________________________________________________________________ >Marc Olivé i Valls | <mailto:marc [at] elnucli>marc [at] elnucli | www.elnucli.com > ><http://www.facebook.com/pages/Manresa-Spain/El-Nucli/128809810270>El Nucli és al Facebook | <http://twitter.com/elnucli>A vegades fem tweets! > >El Nucli 9-08, S.L. | Avinguda de les Bases de Manresa 52-58 1er 3a | 08242 • Manresa >tel: 937.013.260 | fax: 937.013.011 > >(Abans d'imprimir aquest correu penseu en el vostre compromís amb el medi ambient) >On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 6:48 PM, Andrew Culver <<mailto:aculver [at] uwo>aculver [at] uwo> wrote: >Hi Neil, > > >Neil Gunton wrote: >Then I don't see when you would ever use -all, because with any public email system you cannot predict in advance who you will be sending messages to. You never have any idea what their forwarding setups are. So why do you say "during testing"? When would this testing phase end, exactly? How could it ever end, given the intrinsic uncertainty of who you might have to send emails to in the future? > > >You'd be testing who is sending mail, not receiving it. It's up to the receivers to decide how to handle your mail and how to act upon your SPF record. All you can do is make sure your record is correct. > > >All I do know is that I definitely want to make it clear to the world that email coming from me can only originate from my server. > > >The the SPF record you mentioned in your last message should work fine. > > >the microsoft one is NOT spf (same syntax totally different system) called senderID, and not compatable > > >Then their web page is extremely misleading, because they use "SPF" in the title: > ><http://www.microsoft.com/mscorp/safety/content/technologies/senderid/wizard/>http://www.microsoft.com/mscorp/safety/content/technologies/senderid/wizard/ > > >Yes it is. > > >Anybody (like myself) looking around on the web for SPF wizards to help them construct one of these records might reasonably assume that "SPF is SPF", and use this - the result looks identical to the official SPF to me. This is really bad, especially as you're saying they are actually incompatible. > > >It's not that they're incompatible. If you only publish an SPF record, Sender-ID will use that. However, the behaviour of Sender-ID is different from that of SPF. > >It is recommended, that if you do not intend for your SPF record to be used by Sender-ID-aware hosts, that you also publish the following Sender-ID record: > >TXT "spf2.0/pra" > >If, however, you wish to use Sender-ID, you should research it and publish an appropriate record. > > >but I can't remember. Obviously either I misunderstood the questions the wizard asked me, or else the wizard itself was screwed up. > > >usually the second no wizard i have seen approaches anything near to simple logic. > > >Again, this is bad, most people will try to use the wizards rather than spend their time learning the innards of yet another specification. > > >Most SPF records can be generated by asking the simple question: "What hosts are authorized to send mail for your domain?" Then list the IP addresses of those hosts in your SPF record as you have done. > > >the only ip address that matters is the address of my mail server, is that correct? > > >not entirely, not your mail server, but any mail server that is allowed to send mail to others on your behalf > > >The only server that is allowed to send emails to others as coming from me or any of my website processes is my server. I don't know of any situation where some other server is going to be sending emails to others "on my behalf", isn't that just a recipe for spammers to send email as "me"? It should never happen, as far as I know. > > >If, for example, you hired a marketing company to send communications to your customers. If they sent emails from their servers as you, one option would be to add their servers to your SPF record. (There are other, often better solutions for this.) > > >{for example if your server was only used to receive and you used your isp 'isp-x' to send mail only, then your spf should have no mention of your server just the ip's/mames of the isp-x servers) > > >My email server is used to send and receive all my email. > > >Then the record you have is fine. > > > >- all means HARDFAIL all others (ie you recommend that they refuse mail from any other source) >~ all means SOFTFAIL all others (ie you recommend treating other sources with suspicion) >? all means NEUTRAL all others (ie you recommend treating other sources neither positively(pass) or negatively(fail) just treat them the way you do email with no spf) > > >Given that all mail I send or receive goes from/to this one server, isn't this about as solid a case as you could ever get for using -all? > > >Yes. Not all mail environments are as simple as yours. These options are available to allow for increased/softer testing. > >Andrew > > >Thanks again, > >Neil > > >------------------------------------------- >Sender Policy Framework: <http://www.openspf.org>http://www.openspf.org [http://www.openspf.org] >Modify Your Subscription: <http://www.listbox.com/member/>http://www.listbox.com/member/ [http://www.listbox.com/member/] > >Archives: <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/1020/=now>https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/1020/=now >RSS Feed: <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/1020/14525495-91eca367>https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/1020/14525495-91eca367 >Modify Your Subscription: <https://www.listbox.com/member/?&>https://www.listbox.com/member/?& >Unsubscribe Now: <https://www.listbox.com/unsubscribe/?&&post_id=20101202122620:490EFE04-FE39-11DF-8E6B-829DE8F8D026>https://www.listbox.com/unsubscribe/?&&post_id=20101202122620:490EFE04-FE39-11DF-8E6B-829DE8F8D026 >Powered by Listbox: <http://www.listbox.com>http://www.listbox.com > > > >------------------------------------------- >Sender Policy Framework: <http://www.openspf.org>http://www.openspf.org [http://www.openspf.org] >Modify Your Subscription: <http://www.listbox.com/member/>http://www.listbox.com/member/ [http://www.listbox.com/member/] > >Archives: <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/1020/=now>https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/1020/=now >RSS Feed: <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/1020/20135140-294d0708>https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/1020/20135140-294d0708 >Modify Your Subscription: <https://www.listbox.com/member/?&>https://www.listbox.com/member/?& >Unsubscribe Now: <https://www.listbox.com/unsubscribe/?&&post_id=20101202124906:73A3F7CA-FE3C-11DF-A52E-8F0DC6F4DBAC>https://www.listbox.com/unsubscribe/?&&post_id=20101202124906:73A3F7CA-FE3C-11DF-A52E-8F0DC6F4DBAC > >Powered by Listbox: <http://www.listbox.com>http://www.listbox.com > > >Sender Policy Framework: <http://www.openspf.org>http://www.openspf.org >Modify Your Subscription: <http://www.listbox.com/member/>http://www.listbox.com/member/ ><https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/1020/=now>Archives<https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/1020/15739084-a04d3caa> | <https://www.listbox.com/member/?&>Modify Your Subscription | <https://www.listbox.com/unsubscribe/?&&post_id=20101202132950:2F1EAD2E-FE42-11DF-902B-E392F559ED1D>Unsubscribe Now<http://www.listbox.com> ------------------------------------------- Sender Policy Framework: http://www.openspf.org [http://www.openspf.org] Modify Your Subscription: http://www.listbox.com/member/ [http://www.listbox.com/member/] Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/1020/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/1020/1311530-08394398 Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=1311530&id_secret=1311530-644bccd5 Unsubscribe Now: https://www.listbox.com/unsubscribe/?member_id=1311530&id_secret=1311530-512c0f9e&post_id=20101202161047:985D4EC4-FE58-11DF-90D3-E5D876EA70E9 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
|