email forwarding from 123Reg/Host Europe

[#1]

---

@shermans wrote:

Who says it is "Fixed".  It is far from fixed - I cannot reliably send emails still.

---

Please see my PM message - yes, the syntax of the SPF is in error. 

[#2]

Also, if you're looking for our SPF records I'm advised that using these _spf-internal.plus.net and _spf-internal2.plus.net is better than using the Madasafish record, as that record is a series of auto includes that may mean you hit the maximum number of DNS lookups for validation.

[CyberPagan]

 CyberPagan

Well spotted.  I have now corrected that.  I have also removed the second v=spf1 but the 123-Reg instructions certainly show two.  So it now reads :

v=spf1 mx a ip4:94.136.40.163 a:mailex.mailcore.me include:_madasafish.com include:_spf.google.com ~all

However, the MX CHK is still showing the same message - "TXT must be in the right format".  Maybe I have to leave it to settle.

Thanks

[JonoH]

  JonoH

Thanks for the advice.  Would this therefore be the right record  as I have been having problems correcting my record before  :

v=spf1 mx a ip4:94.136.40.163 a:mailex.mailcore.me include:_spf-internal.plus.net include:_spf-internal2.plus.net include:_spf.google.com ~all

I would appreciate your advice greatly because this is all driving me mad.

[#5]

---

@JonoH wrote:

Also, if you're looking for our SPF records I'm advised that using these _spf-internal.plus.net and _spf-internal2.plus.net is better than using the Madasafish record, as that record is a series of auto includes that may mean you hit the maximum number of DNS lookups for validation.

---

Thanks for the update - we have been seeking out this information for quite some time.  I have recently tested the madasafish element and it did pass without hitting the max lookups but, as you say, that may happen.  After many years we now have been advised what SPF record to use for PlusNet outgoing email, so I will make the change - thanks

[JonoH]

---

@shermans wrote:

  JonoH

Thanks for the advice.  Would this therefore be the right record  as I have been having problems correcting my record before  :

v=spf1 mx a ip4:94.136.40.163 a:mailex.mailcore.me include:_spf-internal.plus.net include:_spf-internal2.plus.net include:_spf.google.com ~all

I would appreciate your advice greatly because this is all driving me mad.

---

I believe that is not quite correct, the multiple "include:" should be replaced with "a:"

The "madasafish" required "include:" which automatically carried out a number of DNS lookups, which apparently may then exceed the limit

[#7]

 atb48

Sorry, I am still confused.  Do I leave out the "include:" altogether ?  As in :

v=spf1 mx a ip4:94.136.40.163 a:mailex.mailcore.me a:_spf-internal.plus.net a:_spf-internal2.plus.net a:_spf.google.com ~all

Or should there be one Include, as in :

v=spf1 mx a ip4:94.136.40.163 a:mailex.mailcore.me include:_spf-internal.plus.net a:_spf-internal2.plus.net a:_spf.google.com ~all

This is all Greek to me

Once again thanks for your patience.

[#8]

---

@shermans wrote:

 atb48

Sorry, I am still confused.  Do I leave out the "include:" altogether ?  As in :

v=spf1 mx a ip4:94.136.40.163 a:mailex.mailcore.me a:_spf-internal.plus.net a:_spf-internal2.plus.net a:_spf.google.com ~all

Or should there be one Include, as in :

v=spf1 mx a ip4:94.136.40.163 a:mailex.mailcore.me include:_spf-internal.plus.net a:_spf-internal2.plus.net a:_spf.google.com ~all

This is all Greek to me

Once again thanks for your patience.

---

OK, I've been confused as well!   It is wise not to have too many "includes" in the SPF as the number of DNS lookups are limited to 10, and "includes" can cause multiple lookups, hence PN's comment regarding "madasafish".

HOWEVER PN seems to proposed use of  _spf-internal.plus.net & _spf-internal2.plus.net. Looking more carefully, these 2 references and also _spf.google.com should be handled using "include:" whereas mailex.mailcore.me is a specific reference and hence can use a:.

It would have been helpful if PN had mentioned that include: should be used for its 2 proposed references!  I think the underscore _ is probably the clue! So, as you had previously proposed:

v=spf1 mx a ip4:94.136.40.163 a:mailex.mailcore.me include:_spf-internal.plus.net include:_spf-internal2.plus.net include:_spf.google.com ~all

[#9]

Thanks so much !  I will give it a go and fingers crossed - although apparently it could take 48 hours !

Update

Success !  MX CHK found no faults with spf except that DKIM amd DMARK are not set up, but from what I have read those are steps too far.

I will wait 48 hours to see if things improve.

Thanks again.

[#10]

I thought that my problem was caused by this forwarding issue but it would seem that my email account is just not receiving emails apart from those sent by tech support. I have been without emails since the 15th of March with no explanation as to why and the various technicians that iI have spoken with just tell me "IT'S A KNOWN ISSUE AND WE ARE WORKING ON IT". They did a system refresh and told me to wait 24 hours and it would be working and it's now 72 hours and I am getting VERY p****d off.

[#11]

@lladoogad 

It looks like your mailbox catchall was either off or the main mailbox had been renamed at some point. I've turned the catchall on, and things should sort themselves for new emails in the next 10 minutes or so.

[#12]

Whilst I have to thank you for that.... how come you could sort it in a couple of minutes when I have been told only a few minutes ago by the helpdesk that they had no idea what the problem was and the it was with "an offline team" trying to sort it!

[#13]

Hi @lladoogad,

I'm sorry that this wasn't picked up sooner. We'll make sure the appropriate feedback is passed along to ensure the relevant checks are being done going forward.

[#14]

So has putting this in 123 reg done the trick anyone know

v=spf1 mx a ip4:94.136.40.163 a:mailex.mailcore.me include:_spf-internal.plus.net include:_spf-internal2.plus.net include:_spf.google.com ~all

[#15]

The jury is out.  I changed to this on Monday night and must wait 48 hours.

Outgoing emails are still subject to problems, though and I cannot endure this any longer and so I am actively trying to change email system.