<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Robert Accettura&#039;s Fun With Wordage &#187; rfc1918</title>
	<atom:link href="http://robert.accettura.com/blog/tag/rfc1918/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://robert.accettura.com</link>
	<description>Robert Accettura&#039;s Personal Blog on Web Development and Tech</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 Feb 2012 01:43:47 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<atom:link rel='hub' href='http://robert.accettura.com/?pushpress=hub'/>
<cloud domain='robert.accettura.com' port='80' path='/?rsscloud=notify' registerProcedure='' protocol='http-post' />
		<item>
		<title>Google Mail Fail</title>
		<link>http://robert.accettura.com/blog/2008/09/06/google-mail-fail/</link>
		<comments>http://robert.accettura.com/blog/2008/09/06/google-mail-fail/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 06 Sep 2008 22:12:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Robert</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Google]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Networking]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Spam]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[gmail]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[rfc1918]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[spf]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://robert.accettura.com/?p=1978</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Found an interesting header when doing some tests with mail filtering: Received: from qb-out-1314.google.com ([172.21.30.5]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id k29si2692710qba.7.2008.09.06.14.48.05; Sat, 06 Sep 2008 14:48:06 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: softfail (google.com: domain of transitioning user@example.com does not designate 172.21.30.5 as &#8230; <a href="http://robert.accettura.com/blog/2008/09/06/google-mail-fail/">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Found an interesting header when doing some tests with mail filtering:</p>
<pre>
Received: from qb-out-1314.google.com ([172.21.30.5])
        by mx.google.com with ESMTP id k29si2692710qba.7.2008.09.06.14.48.05;
        Sat, 06 Sep 2008 14:48:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received-SPF: softfail (google.com: domain of transitioning user@example.com does not designate 172.21.30.5 as permitted sender) client-ip=172.21.30.5;
Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=softfail (google.com: domain of transitioning user@example.com does not designate 172.21.30.5 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=user@domain.tld
Received: by qb-out-1314.google.com with SMTP id d5so1543676qbd.6
        for &lt;destination@example.com&gt;; Sat, 06 Sep 2008 14:48:04 -0700 (PDT)
</pre>
<p>See the problem?  Look closely.  In particular look at this line:</p>
<pre>
Received-SPF: softfail (google.com: domain of transitioning user@example.com does not designate 172.21.30.5 as permitted sender) client-ip=172.21.30.5;
</pre>
<p>Look at that IP.  <a href="http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1918">RFC 1918</a> states the &#8220;20-bit block&#8221; (172.16/12) is for private internets.  Google is softfailing emails because it&#8217;s sent through it&#8217;s own mail servers.  Google&#8217;s own SPF record looks like this:</p>
<pre>
;; QUESTION SECTION:
;_spf.google.com.               IN      TXT

;; ANSWER SECTION:
_spf.google.com.        292     IN      TXT     "v=spf1 ip4:216.239.32.0/19 ip4:64.233.160.0/19 ip4:66.249.80.0/20 ip4:72.14.192.0/18 ip4:209.85.128.0/17 ip4:66.102.0.0/20 ip4:74.125.0.0/16 ip4:64.18.0.0/20 ip4:207.126.144.0/20 ?all"
</pre>
<p>I really don&#8217;t understand why Google is doing this.  They should have their SPF checker whitelisting mail sent from their own servers.  SPF is intended to verify the sender.  When sent locally it&#8217;s pointless and can only be harmful.  They can still do other spam checks.</p>
<p>From what I can tell, this seems to happening about 50% of the time, meaning this is something deployed on some but not all Google clusters.
<div id="rja_commentCountImage"><a href="http://robert.accettura.com/?p=1978#comments"><img src="http://robert.accettura.com/wp-content/commentCount/2008/09/405e289.gif" alt="Comment Count" style="border:0;" /></a></div>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://robert.accettura.com/blog/2008/09/06/google-mail-fail/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>4</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

