Re: SPF problems too

On Fri, 15 Jan 2016 19:09:48 +1100
"Joel W. Shea" <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 07:22:36AM +0200, ac wrote:
> > afaik it is because coker.com.au has an "-" and not an "~"
> > dig TXT coker.com.au =  -all not ~all
> 
> That merely changes a FAIL, into a SOFTFAIL (accept and tag), and
> wouldn't solve the actual underlying problem;
> 
> Russell's suggestion to whitelist the "trusted" forwarder is probably
> the better one.

Hello Joel :) 

You snipped out what Stephen said? 

Stephen said that: "This is because SPF is fundamentally broken"

I say that: SPF is not broken.

Russell Coker <[email protected]> wrote:
> bounce.  It seems that the LA servers are broken regarding SPF.  

To which ac replied: 
clearly so. it is bouncing incoming from it's own forwarder...

<snip> Anyway, 

I was merely explaining that the flag forces the fail ,this is the
prerogative of the domain owner.

It is with the "-" flag in the text record of the zone that spf is forced.

For example, were I to send email to the same address as Russel, it
will not fail... (main.me has a "~"  ) 

- I was just explaining why SPF is not broken :)