[Raw Msg Headers][Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: smtpserver rejected something it should not..
- To: email@example.com (Ambrose Li)
- Subject: Re: smtpserver rejected something it should not..
- From: Matti Aarnio <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 19:09:56 +0300 (EET DST)
- Cc: email@example.com
- In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.3.96.970818015607.21006Afirstname.lastname@example.org> from "Ambrose Li" at Aug 18, 97 02:12:58 am
[ Ok, I am back from the IETF, and begining to be able to look at
ZMailer again ... Munich was -- sunny, and d*n hot for me ... ]
[ but I have a new toy also, DEC PSW 433a, which needs my time too. ]
This was privately sent email, but you all need to hear it, I think.
At least this start.
> I have to send this from my office account, though I am at home
> right now. nic.funet.fi is rejecting my home machine at the
> source; can you take a look at what is going on?
Yes, 'senderokwithdns' attribute processing had a bug.
If the source host didn't have MX, but had A, the routine
dnsmxverify() did still consider the result as an error,
because the initial MX lookup yielded empty answer :-(
I have now found, and fixed this at 2.99.49p6a4 (now at
my workstation FTP area.)
> One more thing: /software/zmailer/logs/smtp (my smtp log) is not showing
> anything. The smtp chat sequence leading to the 4.7.1 is not in the smtp
> log, and after a few minutes I actually got a debug message in my syslog
> saying the smtp log cannot be opened, although something was logged just
> a few minutes ago. I find this strange.
??? Are you sure you are running ALL your smtp transport agents
with "-l ..." option ? If the entry is:
command="smtp ..." # -l ...."
then there is no logging for it.. The command string has then ended
before, and the end of the line is comment..
At least the default scheduler.conf has such entries.
> And about why I wanted to send mail to the list in the first place: I
> got policy rejection at the source on aol's postmaster address. I guess
> something in 2.99.49p6a3's policy rejection algorithm is really screwed
> up. (I would suspect it is the dns stuff, but it can be something else.)
I think it is the DNS stuff. My new (2.99.49p6a4) package
accepts AOL ok -- I think it is <email@example.com>, isn't it ?
> I'm going to downgrade my home machine back to 2.99.49p3 and see if I'll
> get the aol mail later.
Try at first:
and see how it differs with 2.99.49p6a3 and latter ones.
Especially, why it refuses AOL's postmaster.
> Ambrose C. Li <firstname.lastname@example.org> Programmer-analyst (sysadmin)
/Matti Aarnio <email@example.com>