From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F40231381F3 for ; Thu, 25 Apr 2013 16:02:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id BC539E0B19; Thu, 25 Apr 2013 16:02:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-wi0-f169.google.com (mail-wi0-f169.google.com [209.85.212.169]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D0AECE0992 for ; Thu, 25 Apr 2013 16:02:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-wi0-f169.google.com with SMTP id h11so9399601wiv.2 for ; Thu, 25 Apr 2013 09:02:34 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:x-originating-ip:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type:x-gm-message-state; bh=G2I6YPM63KTHbgboT3dIJjP3egRjb2c0sZs2L7vwe9Q=; b=YaJ8cieB8xMV/RDRtIAm6l2wyevrtOexKFFufTXKYRW9AKbSlxcqx8A9dGXdU1PzcB jrXPlr9hn+zEOG8z1+g/TaCnUAbRW6DxdkwgZpVKQr1eBkBOdAQLzbHPjutczvbD15Jw IKkXfZ9b6jBra1XT+NQN+JNIhK6QZ3NpCtlR88q92dCHP+rcLWOhGFEk6k9CUbWgSWlE /N2QYTiMld+LN/rKcMKeE7n4yrSRPHFZBQYkM/A8E0VfOJqI+f4ofY7lBliH6orI6rcp DIFPzvsCL7TYwPJouohHCc9APK5yEIPQmPX7D36J3toXf1lj5NTBi2rvf7l8iuq9Mqsl Z8Ew== Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-server@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-server@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.180.211.50 with SMTP id mz18mr89170932wic.24.1366905754472; Thu, 25 Apr 2013 09:02:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.194.163.36 with HTTP; Thu, 25 Apr 2013 09:02:34 -0700 (PDT) X-Originating-IP: [87.198.140.106] In-Reply-To: <82B6ED86-7EE5-43D7-B90C-E7D70B317456@if.ufrj.br> References: <5178E5AF.1090509@loginet.hu> <82B6ED86-7EE5-43D7-B90C-E7D70B317456@if.ufrj.br> Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2013 17:02:34 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-server] SPF Record with Multiple Servers From: Robert Bridge To: gentoo-server@lists.gentoo.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c25d28efe5fa04db318bcd X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQlimffiUrVU4lRyYqpGRdRr3+pxKLeXlg/ieScvO2Wrpsf6rCN4p8tm4wDapoGNQ955SCNj X-Archives-Salt: c4aa6938-ab4e-40de-92e6-9b99c37658cb X-Archives-Hash: e8165271ab3e3db143a09f420a7b2e48 --001a11c25d28efe5fa04db318bcd Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Just the internet facing one, as I understand it. Nothing else should ever see the internal MTA, and it may not even have a routable IP address! On 25 April 2013 16:57, Vin=EDcius Ferr=E3o wro= te: > Hello Halassy, thanks for your reply. > > I'm aware of the syntax, I just mistyped it. > > The main question still continues, should I put both MTAs or just the > Internet facing one? > > Thanks in advance, > > Sent from my iPhone > > On 25/04/2013, at 05:14, "Halassy Zolt=E1n" wrote: > > > Hello! > > > > Using MX in SPF record is a simple way to describe trivial two-way > setups, that is, MX will also send the mails, not just receive them. If y= ou > have a non-trivial setup, you can use, for example IP addresses, like ip6= : > and ip4:. Add every address which from a mail could possibly leave your > organization, and that's it, do not use MX. BTW, the syntax is v=3Dspf1, = not > what you wrote. > > > > 2013-04-25 01:32 keltez=E9ssel, Vin=EDcius Ferr=E3o =EDrta: > >> I've a question about the SPF setup in my domain. > >> > >> We have two MTAs: an exchange server that does not use SMTP to relay > messages to the Internet and a Postfix Mail Gateway on the border to send > and receive messages to/from the internet. > >> > >> The clients connect on the Exchange Server to relay messages to the > external world. So an SMTP connection would start in the Exchange, then i= t > relays to the Postfix server and then to the Internet. On the other hand > when a message come from the Internet it first arrives in the Postfix > server and after the processing it's handled to the Exchange server. > >> > >> The question is: which SPF TXT string I should use? > >> > >> The Postfix server is my only MX. And I don't know if I should include > the Exchange Server name in the SPF rules. > >> > >> I was considering: vspf=3D1 mx -all > >> > >> But this does not include the Exchange, and I don't know if it's right > or not. > > > > > > --001a11c25d28efe5fa04db318bcd Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Just the internet facing one, as I understand it. Nothing = else should ever see the internal MTA, and it may not even have a routable = IP address!


On 25 April 2013 16:57, Vin=EDcius Ferr=E3o <viniciusferrao@if.u= frj.br> wrote:
Hello Halassy, thanks for your reply.

I'm aware of the syntax, I just mistyped it.

The main question still continues, should I put both MTAs or just the Inter= net facing one?

Thanks in advance,

Sent from my iPhone

On 25/04/2013, at 05:14, &quo= t;Halassy Zolt=E1n" <zhalass= y@loginet.hu> wrote:

> Hello!
>
> Using MX in SPF record is a simple way to describe trivial two-way set= ups, that is, MX will also send the mails, not just receive them. If you ha= ve a non-trivial setup, you can use, for example IP addresses, like ip6: an= d ip4:. Add every address which from a mail could possibly leave your organ= ization, and that's it, do not use MX. BTW, the syntax is v=3Dspf1, not= what you wrote.
>
> 2013-04-25 01:32 keltez=E9ssel, Vin=EDcius Ferr=E3o =EDrta:
>> I've a question about the SPF setup in my domain.
>>
>> We have two MTAs: an exchange server that does not use SMTP to rel= ay messages to the Internet and a Postfix Mail Gateway on the border to sen= d and receive messages to/from the internet.
>>
>> The clients connect on the Exchange Server to relay messages to th= e external world. So an SMTP connection would start in the Exchange, then i= t relays to the Postfix server and then to the Internet. On the other hand = when a message come from the Internet it first arrives in the Postfix serve= r and after the processing it's handled to the Exchange server.
>>
>> The question is: which SPF TXT string I should use?
>>
>> The Postfix server is my only MX. And I don't know if I should= include the Exchange Server name in the SPF rules.
>>
>> I was considering: vspf=3D1 mx -all
>>
>> But this does not include the Exchange, and I don't know if it= 's right or not.
>
>


--001a11c25d28efe5fa04db318bcd--