Re: SPF Record Issue

yes, but how do you explain this...

Received: from pmx1.unbeatablesale.biz
(ool-18bbd052.static.optonline.net. [24.187.208.82])
        by mx.google.com with ESMTP id m4si644491qae.157.1969.12.31.16.00.00;
        Mon, 09 Sep 2013 07:55:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of [email protected]
designates 24.187.208.82 as permitted sender) client-ip=24.187.208.82;
Authentication-Results: mx.google.com;
       spf=pass (google.com: domain of [email protected]
designates 24.187.208.82 as permitted sender)
[email protected]

On Mon, Sep 9, 2013 at 2:05 PM, alan <[email protected]> wrote:
> At 18:31 09/09/2013  Monday, Philip Gladstone wrote:
>>Note that the SPF record would allow 24.38.11.30, but the failing IP is 24.38.119.30
>
> damn my eyes Philip yer a star
> (and i even cut pasted that in portions of my response without seeing it)
>
> ignore all i said earlier
>
> note philips response
>
> then after adding the subnet for this ip
>
> fix/update the A for
> pmx1.unbeatablesale.biz to point at 24.38.119.30 (and whatever other ips it has)
> add a txt for
> pmx1.unbeatablesale.biz  "v=spf1 ip4:24.38.119.30 -all"
>
> also add an spf to every other domain used in helo
>
> and add a "v=spf1 -all" to all domains not used in helo or sender address's
> to be thorough in forgery blocking
>
>
> remember SPF is about forgery blocking, people only think it makes your non-forged mails look less spammy because you seem to be trying to block forgeries
>
> (i say this as im personally thinking of amending the positive score for a spf pass on my own hosts so that it only applies if the helo(if in same domain) had an spf and www(if it exists) has an spf also)
>
> just to reward those actually using spf for anti-forgery not for deliverability
> (that said its just an idea thus far)
>
>
>
>>Philip
>>
>>
>>On 9/9/13 1:00 PM, Roman Gelfand wrote:
>>>The ip it failed on is 24.38.11.30.
>>>
>>>In fact, the helo host name doesn't resolve to this address.  Based on
>>>what you mentioned in you previous post, I suppose this is the issue.
>>>
>>>Received: from pmx1.unbeatablesale.biz (mmxr02.unbeatablesale.biz.
>>>[24.38.119.30])
>>>         by mx.google.com with ESMTP id z10si422023qas.154.1969.12.31.16.00.00;
>>>         Mon, 09 Sep 2013 06:05:42 -0700 (PDT)
>>>Received-SPF: fail (google.com: domain of [email protected] does
>>>not designate 24.38.119.30 as permitted sender)
>>>client-ip=24.38.119.30;
>>>Authentication-Results: mx.google.com;
>>>        spf=hardfail (google.com: domain of [email protected]
>>>does not designate 24.38.119.30 as permitted sender)
>>>[email protected]
>>>
>>>
>>>On Mon, Sep 9, 2013 at 12:48 PM, alan <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>At 17:10 09/09/2013  Monday, Roman Gelfand wrote:
>>>>>Yep, you are right.  The domain name is unbeatablesale.com
>>>>ok
>>>>unbeatablesale.com      text = "v=spf1 ip4:98.136.0.0/14 ip4:24.187.208.80/29 ip4:24.38.11.24/29 ip4:108.58.151.0/29 -all"
>>>>
>>>>that is
>>>>98.136.0.0 - 98.136.196.255 (wow)
>>>>24.187.208.80 - 24.187.208.87
>>>>24.38.11.24 - 24.38.11.31
>>>>108.58.151.0 - 108.58.151.7
>>>>
>>>>now what ip is appearing to fail?
>>>>
>>>>as no there is no limit on the number of subnets other than the limits of how many text characters in a typical dns txt reply
>>>>(you are way short of running into this limit thus not a concern)
>>>>
>>>>could you include the pass/fail output of whatever tester was in use?
>>>>
>>>>as it could be reporting not the failure of the spf check on the sender
>>>>[email protected]
>>>>but an spf fail on the domain in the sending systems helo-id (which is a separate test entirely)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>On Mon, Sep 9, 2013 at 12:01 PM, Stuart Gathman <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>On 09/09/2013 11:52 AM, Roman Gelfand wrote:
>>>>>>>I have added the spf text record, below.  The first and second subnets
>>>>>>>are being checked.  However, when sending email from 3rd and 4th
>>>>>>>subnet, spf check fails.  Does this mean only 2 subnets could be
>>>>>>>specified.  If so, what to when there is more subnets?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>v=spf1 ip4:xx.xxx.0.0/14 ip4:24.yy.yyy.yyy.80/29 ip4:zz.zz.zz.24/29
>>>>>>    The second ip4 has 5 octets.   That MUST get PermErr for any IP (but
>>>>>>whatever you are checking with may not be fully conformant.) On the other
>>>>>>hand, that may just be a typo when obfuscating the record.  You are
>>>>>>publishing the record in DNS, for crying out loud, so just give us the
>>>>>>actual record.  Also, people sometimes have trouble with TXT records on
>>>>>>their DNS host, so you should load the record into a test.yourdomain.com
>>>>>>domain on the same DNS server you will be using for production.  Then we can
>>>>>>check that it is actually served correctly.
>>>>>>>ip4:uuu.uu.uuu.0/29 -all
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>-------------------------------------------
>>>>>>Sender Policy Framework: http://www.openspf.net [http://www.openspf.net]
>>>>>>Modify Your Subscription: http://www.listbox.com/member/
>>>>>>[http://www.listbox.com/member/]
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/735/=now
>>>>>>RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/735/24896328-acfdfa29
>>>>>>Modify Your Subscription:
>>>>>>https://www.listbox.com/member/?&
>>>>>>Unsubscribe Now:
>>>>>>https://www.listbox.com/unsubscribe/?&&post_id=20130909120211:2B4082F0-1969-11E3-B924-E2C56875045B
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
>>>>>
>>>>>-------------------------------------------
>>>>>Sender Policy Framework: http://www.openspf.net [http://www.openspf.net]
>>>>>Modify Your Subscription: http://www.listbox.com/member/ [http://www.listbox.com/member/]
>>>>>
>>>>>Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/735/=now
>>>>>RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/735/13124949-ec5a0568
>>>>>Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?&
>>>>>Unsubscribe Now: https://www.listbox.com/unsubscribe/?&&post_id=20130909121059:682580A2-196A-11E3-AEC7-E0792EE61468
>>>>>Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>-------------------------------------------
>>>>Sender Policy Framework: http://www.openspf.net [http://www.openspf.net]
>>>>Modify Your Subscription: http://www.listbox.com/member/ [http://www.listbox.com/member/]
>>>>
>>>>Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/735/=now
>>>>RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/735/24896328-acfdfa29
>>>>Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?&
>>>>Unsubscribe Now: https://www.listbox.com/unsubscribe/?&&post_id=20130909124817:9E65463E-196F-11E3-9A41-BF4B57BB7C94
>>>>Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
>>>
>>>-------------------------------------------
>>>Sender Policy Framework: http://www.openspf.net [http://www.openspf.net]
>>>Modify Your Subscription: http://www.listbox.com/member/ [http://www.listbox.com/member/]
>>>
>>>Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/735/=now
>>>RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/735/835710-69e7d341
>>>Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?&
>>>Unsubscribe Now: https://www.listbox.com/unsubscribe/?&&post_id=20130909130024:4E5D6DC2-1971-11E3-932D-84D22AAAEFF8
>>>Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
>>
>>
>>
>>-------------------------------------------
>>Sender Policy Framework: http://www.openspf.net [http://www.openspf.net]
>>Modify Your Subscription: http://www.listbox.com/member/ [http://www.listbox.com/member/]
>>
>>Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/735/=now
>>RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/735/13124949-ec5a0568
>>Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?&
>>Unsubscribe Now: https://www.listbox.com/unsubscribe/?&&post_id=20130909133207:BA44D594-1975-11E3-B873-E046EBFE4541
>>Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
>