At 3:33 PM 1/10/06, JC Dill wrote:
>>>Received: from mail.pshift.com (MAIL.pshift.com [63.166.217.30]) by
>>> f05n16.cac.psu.edu (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id
>>>k0AGdvkw098116 for
>>> <mungedlistname@lists.psu.edu>; Tue, 10 Jan 2006 11:39:57 -0500
>>>Received: from mungedusername (unverified [64.30.34.237]) by mail.pshift.com
>>> (Vircom SMTPRS 4.2.425.24) with SMTP id
>>> <B0228138434@mail.pshift.com>; Tue, 10 Jan 2006 11:39:41 -0500
>>>Received-SPF: softfail (mail.pshift.com: domain of transitioning
>>> mungeduserid@pshift.com does not designate 64.30.34.237 as
>>> permitted sender)
>>>X-Modus-BlackList: mungeduserid@pshift.com=OK
>
>I don't know that much about SPF - I was wondering if anyone else has
>encountered this and if this is working correctly?
No, this is not working correctly. The folks at pshift.com are
morons. The SPF check, done by their own server, on mail received
from their client, is failing.
Their published SPF record is
v=spf1 mx ip4:63.166.217.0/24 ip4:198.68.168.0/24 ip4:216.57.116.64 ~all
That tells the world that mail claiming to be from pshift.com should
be delivered by a server in one of those IP ranges. And in this
case, the mail delivered to psu.edu from pshit's server at
63.166.217.30 would pass an SPF check, if psu bothered to check it,
since it's in the 63.166.217.0/24 range. But the check isn't being
done by psu. It's being done by pshit's server when it receives the
mail from the client. They shouldn't be SPF-checking within their
own network.
>Could SPF settings
>be causing messages like this to be classified as spam and if so to then
>result in messages from the list being classified as spam?
It shouldn't. The SPF failure didn't occur on a message FROM the
list. It was on a message from the individual subscriber TO the
list. When mail is received FROM the list, if the receiving server
does SPF checking, they should check the sending server's IP address
(which would presumably be somewhere at psu.edu) against any
published SPF information for lists.psu.edu. And, since psu.edu
doesn't publish any SPF information, no server in the world should
SPF-fail any of their mail.
However, based on this, and from the message posted from the
subscriber about her discussion with pshit's chief of IT, it's
obvious that they shouldn't be in the ISP business. There's no
telling what other moronic stuff they might be doing with the mail
when it gets back to them.
References:
|
|
