SPF Record Fails - How to verify Server IP Address and managing multiple SPF records [duplicate]What are SPF records, and how do I configure them?Failed reverse DNS and SPF only when using Thunderbird!What are SPF records, and how do I configure them?Where to set up MX and SPF records on sendMail or google apps mail serverWhat are the correct SPF records to allow both local and Google Apps deliverySPF TXT records - do I need to include sub domains for an outsourced sender SPF recordHow to setup correct SPF recordCombining multiple SPF records - SenderID - kind of lostProper Setup of SPF RecordHow to Properly Set SPF RecordHow do I configure an SPF record to allow all hostnames (A records) under my domain?

What is the line crossing the Pacific Ocean that is shown on maps?

What does grep -v "grep" mean and do?

Generate and graph the Recamán Sequence

How hard is it to sell a home which is currently mortgaged?

UV emitting alien species

Does a centaur PC also count as being mounted?

Alphabet completion rate

What is the olden name for sideburns?

Which ticket do I need to travel by both RER and tram in Paris?

Why did this meteor appear cyan?

In native German words, is Q always followed by U, as in English?

One folder two different locations on ubuntu 18.04

Do 3D printers really reach 50 micron (0.05 mm) accuracy?

Symbol for "not absolutely continuous" in Latex

Why isn’t the tax system continuous rather than bracketed?

Are there any vegetarian astronauts?

What is a macro? Difference between macro and function?

Can a single server be associated with multiple domains?

Hit Pipe with Mower and now it won't turn

Why does this function call behave sensibly after calling it through a typecasted function pointer?

Does the UK have a written constitution?

Did Wakanda officially get the stuff out of Bucky's head?

Do I need a visa for Singapore if I have an Australian PR?

Should I report a leak of confidential HR information?



SPF Record Fails - How to verify Server IP Address and managing multiple SPF records [duplicate]


What are SPF records, and how do I configure them?Failed reverse DNS and SPF only when using Thunderbird!What are SPF records, and how do I configure them?Where to set up MX and SPF records on sendMail or google apps mail serverWhat are the correct SPF records to allow both local and Google Apps deliverySPF TXT records - do I need to include sub domains for an outsourced sender SPF recordHow to setup correct SPF recordCombining multiple SPF records - SenderID - kind of lostProper Setup of SPF RecordHow to Properly Set SPF RecordHow do I configure an SPF record to allow all hostnames (A records) under my domain?






.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;








3
















This question already has an answer here:



  • What are SPF records, and how do I configure them?

    2 answers



I'm trying to verify the mail sent by our server. With our current DNS settings, sending mail from our server shows an SPF Neutral response.



I tried adding a combination of my server's IP and Domain.



v=spf1 a mx ipv4:XXX.XX.XXX.XX -all
v=spf1 include:mydomain.com -all


Both these records showed no change, all mail sent from the server was still Neutral. So I tried combining all my existing SPF records like so:



v=spf1 a mx include:mydomain.com ipv4:XXX.XX.XXX.XX include:cmail1.com include:mail.zendesk.com -all


I tested sending mail again and now get a SPF Fail response.



I've looked extensively online and I can't see how to fix my DNS entries so I can get a PASS on the SPF records. I don't know if I need additional CNAME, A, MX, or I'm missing something entirely.



I'm using a Plesk server with a fixed IPv4 address and using CloudFlare to manage my DNS and Name Servers.



Here is what a full fail response looks like:



SPF: FAIL with IP XXX.XX.XXX.XX
spf=fail (google.com: domain of accounts@mydomain.com does not designate XXX.XX.XXX.XX as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=accounts@mydomain.com
Received-SPF: fail (google.com: domain of accounts@mydomain.com does not designate XXX.XX.XXX.XX as permitted sender) client-ip=XXX.XX.XXX.XX;
spf=fail (google.com: domain of accounts@mydomain.com does not designate XXX.XX.XXX.XX as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=accounts@mydomain.com









share|improve this question













marked as duplicate by Jenny D, Thomas, Ward Jun 13 at 4:06


This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.













  • 1





    What is the TTL on your DNS records look like? how long did you wait to test after making the changes?

    – Zypher
    Jun 14 '17 at 2:51











  • FIXED. I just spent forever talking to my provider and we couldn't figure out why it wasn't working. Be careful! I copied my code from a site which said to use ipv4, it should be ip4! (no v)

    – Maurice
    Jun 14 '17 at 3:28






  • 1





    damn, i totally missed that too. If you put that as a self-answer it'll help others who come by later see it :)

    – Zypher
    Jun 14 '17 at 3:35

















3
















This question already has an answer here:



  • What are SPF records, and how do I configure them?

    2 answers



I'm trying to verify the mail sent by our server. With our current DNS settings, sending mail from our server shows an SPF Neutral response.



I tried adding a combination of my server's IP and Domain.



v=spf1 a mx ipv4:XXX.XX.XXX.XX -all
v=spf1 include:mydomain.com -all


Both these records showed no change, all mail sent from the server was still Neutral. So I tried combining all my existing SPF records like so:



v=spf1 a mx include:mydomain.com ipv4:XXX.XX.XXX.XX include:cmail1.com include:mail.zendesk.com -all


I tested sending mail again and now get a SPF Fail response.



I've looked extensively online and I can't see how to fix my DNS entries so I can get a PASS on the SPF records. I don't know if I need additional CNAME, A, MX, or I'm missing something entirely.



I'm using a Plesk server with a fixed IPv4 address and using CloudFlare to manage my DNS and Name Servers.



Here is what a full fail response looks like:



SPF: FAIL with IP XXX.XX.XXX.XX
spf=fail (google.com: domain of accounts@mydomain.com does not designate XXX.XX.XXX.XX as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=accounts@mydomain.com
Received-SPF: fail (google.com: domain of accounts@mydomain.com does not designate XXX.XX.XXX.XX as permitted sender) client-ip=XXX.XX.XXX.XX;
spf=fail (google.com: domain of accounts@mydomain.com does not designate XXX.XX.XXX.XX as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=accounts@mydomain.com









share|improve this question













marked as duplicate by Jenny D, Thomas, Ward Jun 13 at 4:06


This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.













  • 1





    What is the TTL on your DNS records look like? how long did you wait to test after making the changes?

    – Zypher
    Jun 14 '17 at 2:51











  • FIXED. I just spent forever talking to my provider and we couldn't figure out why it wasn't working. Be careful! I copied my code from a site which said to use ipv4, it should be ip4! (no v)

    – Maurice
    Jun 14 '17 at 3:28






  • 1





    damn, i totally missed that too. If you put that as a self-answer it'll help others who come by later see it :)

    – Zypher
    Jun 14 '17 at 3:35













3












3








3









This question already has an answer here:



  • What are SPF records, and how do I configure them?

    2 answers



I'm trying to verify the mail sent by our server. With our current DNS settings, sending mail from our server shows an SPF Neutral response.



I tried adding a combination of my server's IP and Domain.



v=spf1 a mx ipv4:XXX.XX.XXX.XX -all
v=spf1 include:mydomain.com -all


Both these records showed no change, all mail sent from the server was still Neutral. So I tried combining all my existing SPF records like so:



v=spf1 a mx include:mydomain.com ipv4:XXX.XX.XXX.XX include:cmail1.com include:mail.zendesk.com -all


I tested sending mail again and now get a SPF Fail response.



I've looked extensively online and I can't see how to fix my DNS entries so I can get a PASS on the SPF records. I don't know if I need additional CNAME, A, MX, or I'm missing something entirely.



I'm using a Plesk server with a fixed IPv4 address and using CloudFlare to manage my DNS and Name Servers.



Here is what a full fail response looks like:



SPF: FAIL with IP XXX.XX.XXX.XX
spf=fail (google.com: domain of accounts@mydomain.com does not designate XXX.XX.XXX.XX as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=accounts@mydomain.com
Received-SPF: fail (google.com: domain of accounts@mydomain.com does not designate XXX.XX.XXX.XX as permitted sender) client-ip=XXX.XX.XXX.XX;
spf=fail (google.com: domain of accounts@mydomain.com does not designate XXX.XX.XXX.XX as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=accounts@mydomain.com









share|improve this question















This question already has an answer here:



  • What are SPF records, and how do I configure them?

    2 answers



I'm trying to verify the mail sent by our server. With our current DNS settings, sending mail from our server shows an SPF Neutral response.



I tried adding a combination of my server's IP and Domain.



v=spf1 a mx ipv4:XXX.XX.XXX.XX -all
v=spf1 include:mydomain.com -all


Both these records showed no change, all mail sent from the server was still Neutral. So I tried combining all my existing SPF records like so:



v=spf1 a mx include:mydomain.com ipv4:XXX.XX.XXX.XX include:cmail1.com include:mail.zendesk.com -all


I tested sending mail again and now get a SPF Fail response.



I've looked extensively online and I can't see how to fix my DNS entries so I can get a PASS on the SPF records. I don't know if I need additional CNAME, A, MX, or I'm missing something entirely.



I'm using a Plesk server with a fixed IPv4 address and using CloudFlare to manage my DNS and Name Servers.



Here is what a full fail response looks like:



SPF: FAIL with IP XXX.XX.XXX.XX
spf=fail (google.com: domain of accounts@mydomain.com does not designate XXX.XX.XXX.XX as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=accounts@mydomain.com
Received-SPF: fail (google.com: domain of accounts@mydomain.com does not designate XXX.XX.XXX.XX as permitted sender) client-ip=XXX.XX.XXX.XX;
spf=fail (google.com: domain of accounts@mydomain.com does not designate XXX.XX.XXX.XX as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=accounts@mydomain.com




This question already has an answer here:



  • What are SPF records, and how do I configure them?

    2 answers







spf mx-record cname-record






share|improve this question













share|improve this question











share|improve this question




share|improve this question










asked Jun 14 '17 at 2:46









MauriceMaurice

1263 bronze badges




1263 bronze badges




marked as duplicate by Jenny D, Thomas, Ward Jun 13 at 4:06


This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.









marked as duplicate by Jenny D, Thomas, Ward Jun 13 at 4:06


This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.









  • 1





    What is the TTL on your DNS records look like? how long did you wait to test after making the changes?

    – Zypher
    Jun 14 '17 at 2:51











  • FIXED. I just spent forever talking to my provider and we couldn't figure out why it wasn't working. Be careful! I copied my code from a site which said to use ipv4, it should be ip4! (no v)

    – Maurice
    Jun 14 '17 at 3:28






  • 1





    damn, i totally missed that too. If you put that as a self-answer it'll help others who come by later see it :)

    – Zypher
    Jun 14 '17 at 3:35












  • 1





    What is the TTL on your DNS records look like? how long did you wait to test after making the changes?

    – Zypher
    Jun 14 '17 at 2:51











  • FIXED. I just spent forever talking to my provider and we couldn't figure out why it wasn't working. Be careful! I copied my code from a site which said to use ipv4, it should be ip4! (no v)

    – Maurice
    Jun 14 '17 at 3:28






  • 1





    damn, i totally missed that too. If you put that as a self-answer it'll help others who come by later see it :)

    – Zypher
    Jun 14 '17 at 3:35







1




1





What is the TTL on your DNS records look like? how long did you wait to test after making the changes?

– Zypher
Jun 14 '17 at 2:51





What is the TTL on your DNS records look like? how long did you wait to test after making the changes?

– Zypher
Jun 14 '17 at 2:51













FIXED. I just spent forever talking to my provider and we couldn't figure out why it wasn't working. Be careful! I copied my code from a site which said to use ipv4, it should be ip4! (no v)

– Maurice
Jun 14 '17 at 3:28





FIXED. I just spent forever talking to my provider and we couldn't figure out why it wasn't working. Be careful! I copied my code from a site which said to use ipv4, it should be ip4! (no v)

– Maurice
Jun 14 '17 at 3:28




1




1





damn, i totally missed that too. If you put that as a self-answer it'll help others who come by later see it :)

– Zypher
Jun 14 '17 at 3:35





damn, i totally missed that too. If you put that as a self-answer it'll help others who come by later see it :)

– Zypher
Jun 14 '17 at 3:35










2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes


















1














FIXED. I just spent forever talking to my provider and we couldn't figure out why it wasn't working.



Be careful! I copied my code from a site which said to use ipv4, it should be ip4! (no v)






share|improve this answer






























    0














    While fixing your single syntax error (ipv4 instead of ip4) seems to have fixed your problem, it's still not the only problem with your SPF record. That's why it's always a good idea to read the official documentation to understand the issue.




    • The first one you figured out already in your question by trial and error, but RFC 7208 3.2 is the source that tells it clearly: you should combine your SPF rules for a single hostname as a single TXT record.




      A domain name MUST NOT have multiple records that would cause an authorization check to select more than one record.





    • You should understand what the include mechanism actually does: the specified domain is searched for a match i.e. looked for more SPF rules. Your include:mydomain.com suggests that you try use it like a mechanism. If this is in mydomain.com. TXT, it's a reference that tries to include self!



      You should also revise all your other includes and see that they actually have an SPF record. You should only include existing records.




      Warning: If the domain does not have a valid SPF record, the result is
      a permanent error. Some mail receivers will reject based on a
      PermError.





    • If your a or mx resolves to the same IP address than ip4 they are unnecessary and should be removed. List a server only once.




      Ultimately, SPF lookups resolve to an IP address.



      If the server's IP rarely changes, consider using the ip4:x.x.x.x (or
      ip6) notation so recipients can avoid DNS lookups entirely. Since
      there is a limit of 10 DNS lookups per SPF record, specifying an IP
      address or address range is preferable for long lists of outgoing mail
      servers.



      Often an SPF record can be condensed down to something like v=spf1 ip4:x.x.x.x -all if there is only one outgoing mail server.




    Reading through both the linked articles for SPF syntax and common mistakes is a really good overview of the whole subject. The linked RFC adds all the technical details, if you are also interested in how it works.






    share|improve this answer























    • Great points, thank you Esa. I did remove the mydomain.com include as I realised fairly quickly this was totally wrong.

      – Maurice
      Jun 16 '17 at 4:04



















    2 Answers
    2






    active

    oldest

    votes








    2 Answers
    2






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes









    1














    FIXED. I just spent forever talking to my provider and we couldn't figure out why it wasn't working.



    Be careful! I copied my code from a site which said to use ipv4, it should be ip4! (no v)






    share|improve this answer



























      1














      FIXED. I just spent forever talking to my provider and we couldn't figure out why it wasn't working.



      Be careful! I copied my code from a site which said to use ipv4, it should be ip4! (no v)






      share|improve this answer

























        1












        1








        1







        FIXED. I just spent forever talking to my provider and we couldn't figure out why it wasn't working.



        Be careful! I copied my code from a site which said to use ipv4, it should be ip4! (no v)






        share|improve this answer













        FIXED. I just spent forever talking to my provider and we couldn't figure out why it wasn't working.



        Be careful! I copied my code from a site which said to use ipv4, it should be ip4! (no v)







        share|improve this answer












        share|improve this answer



        share|improve this answer










        answered Jun 14 '17 at 3:36









        MauriceMaurice

        1263 bronze badges




        1263 bronze badges























            0














            While fixing your single syntax error (ipv4 instead of ip4) seems to have fixed your problem, it's still not the only problem with your SPF record. That's why it's always a good idea to read the official documentation to understand the issue.




            • The first one you figured out already in your question by trial and error, but RFC 7208 3.2 is the source that tells it clearly: you should combine your SPF rules for a single hostname as a single TXT record.




              A domain name MUST NOT have multiple records that would cause an authorization check to select more than one record.





            • You should understand what the include mechanism actually does: the specified domain is searched for a match i.e. looked for more SPF rules. Your include:mydomain.com suggests that you try use it like a mechanism. If this is in mydomain.com. TXT, it's a reference that tries to include self!



              You should also revise all your other includes and see that they actually have an SPF record. You should only include existing records.




              Warning: If the domain does not have a valid SPF record, the result is
              a permanent error. Some mail receivers will reject based on a
              PermError.





            • If your a or mx resolves to the same IP address than ip4 they are unnecessary and should be removed. List a server only once.




              Ultimately, SPF lookups resolve to an IP address.



              If the server's IP rarely changes, consider using the ip4:x.x.x.x (or
              ip6) notation so recipients can avoid DNS lookups entirely. Since
              there is a limit of 10 DNS lookups per SPF record, specifying an IP
              address or address range is preferable for long lists of outgoing mail
              servers.



              Often an SPF record can be condensed down to something like v=spf1 ip4:x.x.x.x -all if there is only one outgoing mail server.




            Reading through both the linked articles for SPF syntax and common mistakes is a really good overview of the whole subject. The linked RFC adds all the technical details, if you are also interested in how it works.






            share|improve this answer























            • Great points, thank you Esa. I did remove the mydomain.com include as I realised fairly quickly this was totally wrong.

              – Maurice
              Jun 16 '17 at 4:04















            0














            While fixing your single syntax error (ipv4 instead of ip4) seems to have fixed your problem, it's still not the only problem with your SPF record. That's why it's always a good idea to read the official documentation to understand the issue.




            • The first one you figured out already in your question by trial and error, but RFC 7208 3.2 is the source that tells it clearly: you should combine your SPF rules for a single hostname as a single TXT record.




              A domain name MUST NOT have multiple records that would cause an authorization check to select more than one record.





            • You should understand what the include mechanism actually does: the specified domain is searched for a match i.e. looked for more SPF rules. Your include:mydomain.com suggests that you try use it like a mechanism. If this is in mydomain.com. TXT, it's a reference that tries to include self!



              You should also revise all your other includes and see that they actually have an SPF record. You should only include existing records.




              Warning: If the domain does not have a valid SPF record, the result is
              a permanent error. Some mail receivers will reject based on a
              PermError.





            • If your a or mx resolves to the same IP address than ip4 they are unnecessary and should be removed. List a server only once.




              Ultimately, SPF lookups resolve to an IP address.



              If the server's IP rarely changes, consider using the ip4:x.x.x.x (or
              ip6) notation so recipients can avoid DNS lookups entirely. Since
              there is a limit of 10 DNS lookups per SPF record, specifying an IP
              address or address range is preferable for long lists of outgoing mail
              servers.



              Often an SPF record can be condensed down to something like v=spf1 ip4:x.x.x.x -all if there is only one outgoing mail server.




            Reading through both the linked articles for SPF syntax and common mistakes is a really good overview of the whole subject. The linked RFC adds all the technical details, if you are also interested in how it works.






            share|improve this answer























            • Great points, thank you Esa. I did remove the mydomain.com include as I realised fairly quickly this was totally wrong.

              – Maurice
              Jun 16 '17 at 4:04













            0












            0








            0







            While fixing your single syntax error (ipv4 instead of ip4) seems to have fixed your problem, it's still not the only problem with your SPF record. That's why it's always a good idea to read the official documentation to understand the issue.




            • The first one you figured out already in your question by trial and error, but RFC 7208 3.2 is the source that tells it clearly: you should combine your SPF rules for a single hostname as a single TXT record.




              A domain name MUST NOT have multiple records that would cause an authorization check to select more than one record.





            • You should understand what the include mechanism actually does: the specified domain is searched for a match i.e. looked for more SPF rules. Your include:mydomain.com suggests that you try use it like a mechanism. If this is in mydomain.com. TXT, it's a reference that tries to include self!



              You should also revise all your other includes and see that they actually have an SPF record. You should only include existing records.




              Warning: If the domain does not have a valid SPF record, the result is
              a permanent error. Some mail receivers will reject based on a
              PermError.





            • If your a or mx resolves to the same IP address than ip4 they are unnecessary and should be removed. List a server only once.




              Ultimately, SPF lookups resolve to an IP address.



              If the server's IP rarely changes, consider using the ip4:x.x.x.x (or
              ip6) notation so recipients can avoid DNS lookups entirely. Since
              there is a limit of 10 DNS lookups per SPF record, specifying an IP
              address or address range is preferable for long lists of outgoing mail
              servers.



              Often an SPF record can be condensed down to something like v=spf1 ip4:x.x.x.x -all if there is only one outgoing mail server.




            Reading through both the linked articles for SPF syntax and common mistakes is a really good overview of the whole subject. The linked RFC adds all the technical details, if you are also interested in how it works.






            share|improve this answer













            While fixing your single syntax error (ipv4 instead of ip4) seems to have fixed your problem, it's still not the only problem with your SPF record. That's why it's always a good idea to read the official documentation to understand the issue.




            • The first one you figured out already in your question by trial and error, but RFC 7208 3.2 is the source that tells it clearly: you should combine your SPF rules for a single hostname as a single TXT record.




              A domain name MUST NOT have multiple records that would cause an authorization check to select more than one record.





            • You should understand what the include mechanism actually does: the specified domain is searched for a match i.e. looked for more SPF rules. Your include:mydomain.com suggests that you try use it like a mechanism. If this is in mydomain.com. TXT, it's a reference that tries to include self!



              You should also revise all your other includes and see that they actually have an SPF record. You should only include existing records.




              Warning: If the domain does not have a valid SPF record, the result is
              a permanent error. Some mail receivers will reject based on a
              PermError.





            • If your a or mx resolves to the same IP address than ip4 they are unnecessary and should be removed. List a server only once.




              Ultimately, SPF lookups resolve to an IP address.



              If the server's IP rarely changes, consider using the ip4:x.x.x.x (or
              ip6) notation so recipients can avoid DNS lookups entirely. Since
              there is a limit of 10 DNS lookups per SPF record, specifying an IP
              address or address range is preferable for long lists of outgoing mail
              servers.



              Often an SPF record can be condensed down to something like v=spf1 ip4:x.x.x.x -all if there is only one outgoing mail server.




            Reading through both the linked articles for SPF syntax and common mistakes is a really good overview of the whole subject. The linked RFC adds all the technical details, if you are also interested in how it works.







            share|improve this answer












            share|improve this answer



            share|improve this answer










            answered Jun 14 '17 at 6:09









            Esa JokinenEsa Jokinen

            25k2 gold badges36 silver badges62 bronze badges




            25k2 gold badges36 silver badges62 bronze badges












            • Great points, thank you Esa. I did remove the mydomain.com include as I realised fairly quickly this was totally wrong.

              – Maurice
              Jun 16 '17 at 4:04

















            • Great points, thank you Esa. I did remove the mydomain.com include as I realised fairly quickly this was totally wrong.

              – Maurice
              Jun 16 '17 at 4:04
















            Great points, thank you Esa. I did remove the mydomain.com include as I realised fairly quickly this was totally wrong.

            – Maurice
            Jun 16 '17 at 4:04





            Great points, thank you Esa. I did remove the mydomain.com include as I realised fairly quickly this was totally wrong.

            – Maurice
            Jun 16 '17 at 4:04



            Popular posts from this blog

            Club Baloncesto Breogán Índice Historia | Pavillón | Nome | O Breogán na cultura popular | Xogadores | Adestradores | Presidentes | Palmarés | Historial | Líderes | Notas | Véxase tamén | Menú de navegacióncbbreogan.galCadroGuía oficial da ACB 2009-10, páxina 201Guía oficial ACB 1992, páxina 183. Editorial DB.É de 6.500 espectadores sentados axeitándose á última normativa"Estudiantes Junior, entre as mellores canteiras"o orixinalHemeroteca El Mundo Deportivo, 16 setembro de 1970, páxina 12Historia do BreogánAlfredo Pérez, o último canoneiroHistoria C.B. BreogánHemeroteca de El Mundo DeportivoJimmy Wright, norteamericano do Breogán deixará Lugo por ameazas de morteResultados de Breogán en 1986-87Resultados de Breogán en 1990-91Ficha de Velimir Perasović en acb.comResultados de Breogán en 1994-95Breogán arrasa al Barça. "El Mundo Deportivo", 27 de setembro de 1999, páxina 58CB Breogán - FC BarcelonaA FEB invita a participar nunha nova Liga EuropeaCharlie Bell na prensa estatalMáximos anotadores 2005Tempada 2005-06 : Tódolos Xogadores da Xornada""Non quero pensar nunha man negra, mais pregúntome que está a pasar""o orixinalRaúl López, orgulloso dos xogadores, presume da boa saúde económica do BreogánJulio González confirma que cesa como presidente del BreogánHomenaxe a Lisardo GómezA tempada do rexurdimento celesteEntrevista a Lisardo GómezEl COB dinamita el Pazo para forzar el quinto (69-73)Cafés Candelas, patrocinador del CB Breogán"Suso Lázare, novo presidente do Breogán"o orixinalCafés Candelas Breogán firma el mayor triunfo de la historiaEl Breogán realizará 17 homenajes por su cincuenta aniversario"O Breogán honra ao seu fundador e primeiro presidente"o orixinalMiguel Giao recibiu a homenaxe do PazoHomenaxe aos primeiros gladiadores celestesO home que nos amosa como ver o Breo co corazónTita Franco será homenaxeada polos #50anosdeBreoJulio Vila recibirá unha homenaxe in memoriam polos #50anosdeBreo"O Breogán homenaxeará aos seus aboados máis veteráns"Pechada ovación a «Capi» Sanmartín e Ricardo «Corazón de González»Homenaxe por décadas de informaciónPaco García volve ao Pazo con motivo do 50 aniversario"Resultados y clasificaciones""O Cafés Candelas Breogán, campión da Copa Princesa""O Cafés Candelas Breogán, equipo ACB"C.B. Breogán"Proxecto social"o orixinal"Centros asociados"o orixinalFicha en imdb.comMario Camus trata la recuperación del amor en 'La vieja música', su última película"Páxina web oficial""Club Baloncesto Breogán""C. B. Breogán S.A.D."eehttp://www.fegaba.com

            Vilaño, A Laracha Índice Patrimonio | Lugares e parroquias | Véxase tamén | Menú de navegación43°14′52″N 8°36′03″O / 43.24775, -8.60070

            Cegueira Índice Epidemioloxía | Deficiencia visual | Tipos de cegueira | Principais causas de cegueira | Tratamento | Técnicas de adaptación e axudas | Vida dos cegos | Primeiros auxilios | Crenzas respecto das persoas cegas | Crenzas das persoas cegas | O neno deficiente visual | Aspectos psicolóxicos da cegueira | Notas | Véxase tamén | Menú de navegación54.054.154.436928256blindnessDicionario da Real Academia GalegaPortal das Palabras"International Standards: Visual Standards — Aspects and Ranges of Vision Loss with Emphasis on Population Surveys.""Visual impairment and blindness""Presentan un plan para previr a cegueira"o orixinalACCDV Associació Catalana de Cecs i Disminuïts Visuals - PMFTrachoma"Effect of gene therapy on visual function in Leber's congenital amaurosis"1844137110.1056/NEJMoa0802268Cans guía - os mellores amigos dos cegosArquivadoEscola de cans guía para cegos en Mortágua, PortugalArquivado"Tecnología para ciegos y deficientes visuales. Recopilación de recursos gratuitos en la Red""Colorino""‘COL.diesis’, escuchar los sonidos del color""COL.diesis: Transforming Colour into Melody and Implementing the Result in a Colour Sensor Device"o orixinal"Sistema de desarrollo de sinestesia color-sonido para invidentes utilizando un protocolo de audio""Enseñanza táctil - geometría y color. Juegos didácticos para niños ciegos y videntes""Sistema Constanz"L'ocupació laboral dels cecs a l'Estat espanyol està pràcticament equiparada a la de les persones amb visió, entrevista amb Pedro ZuritaONCE (Organización Nacional de Cegos de España)Prevención da cegueiraDescrición de deficiencias visuais (Disc@pnet)Braillín, un boneco atractivo para calquera neno, con ou sen discapacidade, que permite familiarizarse co sistema de escritura e lectura brailleAxudas Técnicas36838ID00897494007150-90057129528256DOID:1432HP:0000618D001766C10.597.751.941.162C97109C0155020