On 5/19/23 09:10, Christian via Mailman-users wrote:
May 18 12:53:11 lists postfix/smtp[28104]: C9D7A1005DA: to=<billb6951@gmail.com>, relay=gmail-smtp-in.l.google.com[142.250.138.27]:25, delay=0.69, delays=0.01/0.01/0.14/0.53, dsn=5.7.26, status=bounced (host gmail-smtp-in.l.google.com[142.250.138.27] said: 550-5.7.26 The MAIL FROM domain [lists.ccalternatives.org] has an SPF record 550-5.7.26 with a hard fail policy (-all) but it fails to pass SPF checks with 550-5.7.26 the ip: [192.46.218.224]. To best protect our users from spam and 550-5.7.26 phishing, the message has been blocked. Please visit 550-5.7.26 https://support.google.com/mail/answer/81126#authentication for more 550 5.7.26 information. p3-20020a056870868300b001926c1449a6si1393979oam.240 - gsmtp (in reply to end of DATA command))
dig txt lists.ccalternatives.org reports
"v=spf1 a mx ip4=192.46.218.224 -all"
It should be
"v=spf1 a mx ip4:192.46.218.224 -all"
i.e. :, not =
Could the hard fail policy be implicated in the gmail rejection?
Yes but only because the ip4 is not effective due to the syntax error. ~all could help, but I suspect replacing the = with : will do it.
-- Mark Sapiro <mark@msapiro.net> The highway is for gamblers, San Francisco Bay Area, California better use your sense - B. Dylan