Am 10.03.2012 02:08, schrieb Nick Edwards: >> thelounge.net. 86400 IN SPF "v=spf1 ip4:91.118.73.15 >> ip4:91.118.73.20 ip4:91.118.73.17 >> ip4:91.118.73.6 ip4:91.118.73.32 ip4:91.118.73.38 ip4:91.118.73.30 >> ip4:91.118.73.1 ip4:89.207.144.27 -all" >> >> thelounge.net. 86400 IN TXT "v=spf1 ip4:91.118.73.15 >> ip4:91.118.73.20 ip4:91.118.73.17 >> ip4:91.118.73.6 ip4:91.118.73.32 ip4:91.118.73.38 ip4:91.118.73.30 >> ip4:91.118.73.1 ip4:89.207.144.27 -all" > > yes but I also include 'mx' and I never use 'a' or ptr, they are > IMHO too wide, BTW, I hope you also use spf2.0 settings as well, makes > it easier to get higher confidence level in sending to > hotmail/live.com :->
no because i did not notice about spf2.0 until now and do not find anything about it on openspf.org http://www.openspf.org/SPF_Record_Syntax have you some good documentation/examples since i am the developer of our admin-backends it should be easy to integrate any record-types P.S.: i changed the above ip4-records recently to CIDR notification should solve possible problems with too large TXT types for UDP in case of additional entries for some domains
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
