How to set spf DNS record

[#1]

I sometimes have emails bounced as spam  when sending to e.g.  gmail and other third party servers.  mx toolbox reports no DNS record for SPF, and I'm told this may be the issue?  It happens if I send a legitimate link to a website preceded by not too much text.  My domain is sykesj.co.uk 

[#2]

Not much you can do I'm afraid. Our hosting platform doesn't support the creation of TXT records, so you can't create SPF entries. Only current method of achieving this would be to transfer your domain to another hosting company.

[#3]

Thanks Bob, confirms what I thought may be the case.

John

[#4]

@JohnBS  probably best in the long run to move the domain, but if you dont want the hassle in the short term then there is a unsupported workaround.

Create an MX record on your domain as follows using the domain configure option in the member centre

Type: MX
Priority: 999999
Right Field: please-add-spf-records

This will then, in the usual time frames, add the following record:

v=spf1 a mx include:_spf-internal.plus.net include:_spf-internal2.plus.net ~all

[#5]

Wow, I'm out of the loop!

Thanks @MisterW, I wasn't aware this script existed.

[#6]

Bob,

A bit of voodoo from Jon produced a few months back with SU encouragement!

[#7]

Hi

Until this afternoon I had no idea what an SPF record was. I’ve been using a third-party email and domain provider so haven’t had the problem before, but it’s going to be switched off.

I have been told although my email address has been added to a safe senders list it does not guarantee it will get through without an SPF record. I have a xxxxx.me.uk Plusnet address rather than the standard xxxxx.plus.com one so I’d rather not move the domain unless I have to.

If I follow these instructions, can they be undone if it causes problems. Also on Plusnet’s support pages it says MX records only affect incoming mail and cannot be used for sending mail - can I ignore this?

It mentions the usual time frames. How long is this likely to be?

Thanks 

David 

[#8]

You can follow the guidance herein with reasonable confidence.

[#9]

@dgp  to answer your remaining questions :-

Usual timeframe - I think  up to 6 hrs 

To remove the spf records simply delete the MX 999999 record

[#10]

Thanks all. I’ll give it a try this morning.

David

[#11]

@MisterW Thanks. It all seems to work, but I've had this response from the receiving IT support team.

Hi David,

It appears that there is indeed now an SPF record on that domain. In our experience its best to ensure that '-all' is used instead of '~all' at the end of the record as it has been known to cause problems in the past. However, your Emails should now get through.

Is there anyway of changing this? Or are they exaggerating the potential problem?

Thanks for your help again.

David

[#12]

@dgp there isn't any way to change it I'm afraid. The norm is to use ~all since that will give a soft fail in the case of an spf fail

Once you have implemented all IP addresses and include tags you should end your record with an ~all or -all tag. The all tag is an important part of the SPF record as it indicates what policy should be applied when ISPs detect a server which is not listed in your SPF record. If an unauthorized server does send email on behalf of your domain, action is taken according to the policy that has been published (e.g. reject the email or mark it as spam).What is the difference between these tags? You need to instruct how strict servers need to treat the emails. The ~all tag indicates a soft fail and the -all indicates a hardfail. The all tag has the following basic markers:
-all Fail – servers that aren’t listed in the SPF record are not authorized to send email (not compliant emails will be rejected).
~all Softfail – If the email is received from a server that isn’t listed, the email will be marked as a soft fail (emails will be accepted but marked).
+all We strongly recommend not to use this option, this tag allows any server to send email from your domain.

Hope that helps explain...

IMHO they're exaggerating any possible problem

[#13]

@MisterW Thanks for your prompt and detailed reply. I now know a lot more than I did yesterday!. The ~all softfail tag does make much more sense.