Ok, I findout some stuff here:
1 - This is not the only message this happens. Other messages that
should have triggered SPF rules did not.
2 - This is happening when using spamd.
3 - When running these messages by hand against spamassassin -D
never got a missing SPF rule.
So, for some reason, spamd sometimes skips SPF tests.
Is this right? Would spamd skip some tests for any reason? Load?
Network timeout?
Any pointer is appreciated.
- Raul Dias
On Mon, 2005-06-06 at 17:32 -0300, Raul Dias wrote:
> hi,
>
> Is the SPF code working 100%?
>
> I got a mail from hotmail that did not get any SPF result.
> here is a snippet of the header:
>
> From: XXXX <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Received: from hotmail.com (bay23-f11.bay23.hotmail.com [64.4.22.61])
> FOO2*** (8.12.5/8.11.6) with ESMTP id j56K53jT028676 for
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Mon, 6 Jun 2005 17:05:07 -0300
>
>
> Now playing with SPF with dig:
>
> $ dig hotmail.com TXT
> ...
> hotmail.com. 2649 IN TXT "v=spf1
> include:spf-a.hotmail.com include:spf-b.hotmail.com
> include:spf-c.hotmail.com include:spf-d.hotmail.com ~all"
> ...
>
> $ dig spf-b.hotmail.com TXT
> ...
> spf-b.hotmail.com. 2669 IN TXT "v=spf1
> ip4:199.103.90.0/23 ip4:204.182.144.0/24 ip4:204.255.244.0/23
> ip4:206.138.168.0/21 ip4:64.4.0.0/18 ip4:65.54.128.0/17
> ip4:207.68.128.0/18 ip4:207.68.192.0/20 ip4:207.82.250.0/23
> ip4:207.82.252.0/23 ip4:209.1.112.0/23 ~all"
> ...
>
>
>
> And here it is 64.4.0.0/18, which 64.4.22.61 belongs.
>
>
> So, my question is why there was no SPF_* result for this entry?
> Is this a bug? Or am I missing the point?
>
> Mail::SPF::Query is the latest one.
>
> Other hotmail messages got the SPF_HELO_PASS fine.
>
>
>
> - Raul Dias
>
>
>
>
--
Raul Dias <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
