Experts and documentation provide a comprehensive overview of SPF records and email deliverability for small mail servers. Key takeaways include the danger of useless SPF records and a skeptical perspective on SPF itself. Experience shows Gmail might not always treat emails from small servers as bulk. Unknown IPs are often considered spam. A critical limit of 10 DNS lookups exists, and common errors include exceeding this limit, incorrect syntax, and omitting sending sources. SPF flattening and simple records can mitigate lookup issues. For Exchange Online, including Microsoft's servers is essential. The SPF specification (RFC 4408) outlines the framework. Permissive SPF records (?all or ~all) are risky. Regular monitoring, validation, and third-party sender inclusion are best practices. A hard fail (-all) is recommended. Multiple SPF records are detrimental. DNS propagation time matters. DMARC alignment is crucial, and mail forwarding can introduce complexities addressed by rewriting the envelope sender. Finally, the 'exists' mechanism in SPF should be avoided due to its inefficiency.
10 marketer opinions
Several common misconceptions and best practices regarding SPF records and email deliverability for small mail servers were identified. Common errors include exceeding DNS lookup limits, incorrect syntax, and not including all sending sources. It's a misconception that permissive SPF records (?all or ~all) are always safe, as they can be exploited by spammers. Best practices include using SPF flattening to reduce DNS lookups, regularly monitoring SPF records, simplifying SPF records, validating syntax, including all third-party senders, using a hard fail (-all), avoiding multiple SPF records, and accounting for DNS propagation time. Proper SPF record implementation is essential for ensuring email authentication and improving deliverability, especially for small mail servers.
Marketer view
Email marketer from MXToolbox shares the best practice of using tools like MXToolbox to validate your SPF record syntax and ensure it doesn't contain errors that could impact deliverability.
26 Jun 2024 - MXToolbox
Marketer view
Email marketer from EmailOnAcid advises including all third-party senders (e.g., marketing automation platforms, transactional email services) in your SPF record to ensure their emails are authenticated.
2 Sep 2021 - EmailOnAcid
7 expert opinions
Experts highlight several key points regarding SPF records and email deliverability for small mail servers. One expert emphasizes the danger of useless SPF records, while another views SPF with skepticism. Experiences with a small mail server show that Gmail doesn't automatically treat mail as bulk even without specific SPF configurations. Sending from previously unknown IPs often results in emails being marked as spam. Common SPF mistakes include exceeding DNS lookup limits, not including all sending sources, and incorrect syntax. Forwarding mail can cause issues with SPF records, potentially requiring rewriting the envelope sender. The 'exists' mechanism in SPF is often slow and not particularly helpful. These insights stress the importance of careful SPF record configuration and awareness of potential pitfalls.
Expert view
Expert from Email Geeks shares her experience with a small mail server, noting that Gmail didn't put their mail into bulk, even after moving the server and not publishing -all. She uses this as a counterexample to claims of Gmail being evil.
16 Jan 2025 - Email Geeks
Expert view
Expert from Email Geeks shares his perspective on SPF, stating, "I don't believe in SPF in the way I don't believe in parking tickets, not in the way I don't believe in bigfoot."
25 Sep 2022 - Email Geeks
4 technical articles
Documentation from various sources highlights crucial aspects of SPF records and their impact on email deliverability. Google's documentation emphasizes the 10 DNS lookup limit, while Microsoft advises including their servers' SPF record for Exchange Online. RFC 4408 specifies the SPF framework and its limitations. DMARC.org clarifies that for DMARC to pass via SPF, the domain in the `Mail From` address must align with the domain in the SPF record. These points underscore the importance of adhering to SPF specifications, managing DNS lookups, and ensuring proper alignment for DMARC compliance.
Technical article
Documentation from DMARC.org clarifies that for DMARC to pass based on SPF, the domain in the `Mail From` address (Return-Path) must align with the domain used in the SPF record. This is a common misconception that affects DMARC compliance.
12 Jan 2025 - DMARC.org
Technical article
Documentation from Google Workspace Admin Help explains that SPF records have a lookup limit of 10, which can cause issues if exceeded, impacting deliverability. Exceeding the limit can cause SPF checks to fail.
13 Jan 2022 - Google Workspace Admin Help
Against which domain is SPF checked?
Are SPF, DKIM, and DMARC records necessary for transactional email servers not used for marketing?
Can a sender modify SPF records to alter SPF checking behavior?
Do small email senders need their own SPF/DKIM records or can they rely on their ESP?
How can I improve SPF alignment and email deliverability when using Hubspot?
How do I properly set up SPF and DKIM records for email marketing, including handling multiple SPF records, IP ranges, bounce capturing, and Google Postmaster Tools verification?