Re: Determining FQDN (was Re: Yow, Madduck!)
On Fri, Jan 11, 2002 at 05:05:42PM -0600, Richard Cobbe wrote: | Lo, on Thursday, January 10, dman did write: | | SNIP | | One minor nit to pick from an otherwise very good explanation (and I | wouldn't bother, except that I've been bitten by this before). | | This directive tells exim to use that name as the hostname in the SMTP | greeting (HELO/EHLO) instead of that reported by the gethostbyname() C | function (which returns the first thing after 127.0.0.1 in | /etc/hosts). | | SNIP | | Not quite. gethostbyname() returns the host record for whatever name or | address you supply as a parameter. I think, although I'm not actually | certain, that by default, MTAs like exim use the machine's FQDN on the | HELO/EHLO line. Yes, by default exim uses the result of uname() or gethostbyname() in the EHLO line. | Finding the FQDN is a somewhat complicated process: Somewhat. Here's what I learned from my experiences : /etc/hosts : 127.0.0.1 localhost dman /etc/hostname : dman /etc/resolv.conf domain ddts.net So my machine is dman.ddts.net, right? Not quite. The uname() function only returns dman. Since it doesn't contain any dots, exim continues with gethostbyname() to find the FQHN. | 2) Pass this value to gethostbyname(3) That's an interesing choice. When I was testing out the results to see what this function does, I passed localhost to gethostbyname(). I found that gethostbyname() returned the first thing in the 127.0.0.1 line. That was why exim was using localhost in gethostbyname() (and hotmail's mx handlers were rejecting that). When I put dman.ddts.net as the first entry on the 127.0.0.1 line, exim (correctly) used that in the EHLO line. The easiest, but not wholly correct, solution was to set primary_hostname in exim.conf. After determining the above, though, I corrected /etc/hosts so that all programs can properly determine the FQHN. | In either situation, the order of the hostnames on the line *is* | signficant! Right. -D -- It took the computational power of three Commodore 64s to fly to the moon. It takes at least a 486 to run Windows 95. Something is wrong here.
Re: Yow, Madduck!
On Thu, Jan 10, 2002 at 09:38:44PM -0500, Jeremy L. Gaddis wrote: If you're on a dialup link, why don't you use your ISP's mail server as a smart host? Let them take care of your mail delivery. Which is great unless one of your ISP's smarthosts is misconfigured and sends a non-fully-qualified domain name in HELO. :( Whenever I need to e-mail Martin, I end up doing mail routing manually by bouncing the mail via another machine. Of course, the chances of my ISP actually listening to a bug report are ... minimal. -- Colin Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Yow, Madduck!
On Fri, Jan 11, 2002 at 12:02:12AM -0500, Brenda J. Butler wrote: | Well, I had two drivers in the ROUTERS section, and smarthost | was second with a route_list whose match-this-pattern was | *. I moved it above lookuphost and it seems to work. Let's | see if it keeps working and doesn't break anything else (not | that I think exim tends to break, but I tend to break things | when I mess with them). | | I had put it after lookuphost because I misunderstood the part | in the exim manual that said A router like this should be | the last one in the configuration file, since it will route any | domain whatsoever. What that meants was if you wanted to handle certain hosts specially. For example, say you want mail destined for madduck.net to be routed to a certain handler and other mail to be handled by the smarthost. You would put a router in that handles madduck.net first, then the * (everything not yet handled) router. You have 2 routers (lookuphost and smarthost) that both handle everything. This means that the first actually gets everything and the other is pointless. | So that's the first part fixed: now I'm using my isp | as a smarthost (and the isp even seems to accept it! Great!) | | The next part is to try to make the message come from something | that can be resolved. Your ISP can resolve you (as much as it really wants to), and others can resolve it. | Here are the Received headers from my email to myself (I sent it to | an external mail re-director). Ok, let's work our way through them, from beginning to end (the first one is last in the list). | Received: from bjb by seal with local (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) | id 16OtJ9-0004QT-00; Thu, 10 Jan 2002 23:28:47 -0500 The first thing that happened is exim was run by the user 'bjb' and given a message. The message arrived via a pipe (standard practice for mailers and scripts) instead of from a socket. | Received: from seal ([EMAIL PROTECTED] [209.151.2.114]) | by web30.achilles.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id XAA21655 | for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Thu, 10 Jan 2002 23:17:20 -0500 Nex the system web30.achilles.net received the message vis ESMTP from a host who said it was 'seal' in the EHLO command, but whose IP is 209.151.2.114 which resolves to [EMAIL PROTECTED] (I didn't think the @ was legal in a hostname though, perhaps that is just something the MTA sticks in the header). Additionally that MTA records that the envelope recipient (in the RCPT TO: command) is [EMAIL PROTECTED]. The message is now out of your system and has been accepted by the next system (your ISP's smarthost). You have no control over anything else that happens to it. | Received: from web30.achilles.net (web30.achilles.net [209.151.0.6]) | by machine.remailer.address (Build 101 8.9.3/NT-8.9.3) with ESMTP id XAA09994 | for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Thu, 10 Jan 2002 23:31:03 -0500 Next web30.achilles.net (whose IP reverse-lookup's to its name) handed the message off to machine.remailer.address. It appears that that is a system running on Windows NT (based on that build number). | Received: from unknown (HELO machine.remailer.address) (206.99.235.25) | by samaria.achilles.net with SMTP; 11 Jan 2002 04:30:36 - I'd say that your ISP has its 'doze machine misconfigured because it claims it is machine.remailer.address but that name doesn't exist. The IP of the machine is 206.99.235.25. That system handed the message to samaria.achilles.net. | Received: (qmail 21575 invoked from network); 11 Jan 2002 04:30:36 - qmail got the message next. Pretty sparse data here. I guess one would need to be familiar with qmail's operation to know what invoked from network means. Still, it doesn't say what machine or anything. | Received: from pop1.achilles.net | by localhost with POP3 (fetchmail-5.3.3) | for [EMAIL PROTECTED] (single-drop); Thu, 10 Jan 2002 23:31:48 -0500 (EST) The next thing that is recorded as happening is that pop1.achillies.net gives the message to localhost. Fetchmail grabbed the message via POP3 and delivers it to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Presumably localhost here is your own machine. | Received: from localhost [127.0.0.1] (bjb) | by seal with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) | id 16OtM4-0004Rn-00; Thu, 10 Jan 2002 23:31:48 -0500 | Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] The last thing that happend is fetchmail handed it to exim via SMTP (I suggest changing fetchmail to use a pipe instead). Your machine received it and delivered it to you. | So machine.remailer.address thinks it is getting the message from | web30.achilles.net which can be resolved: should this be sufficient? Even before that, since web30.achilles.net accepted the message it is sufficient. | Or is the next Received header (Received: from unknown...) trying | to tell me something about my exim.conf? Nope, it is telling you that your ISP is (partially) messed up :-). The purpose of the Received: headers are just to allow admins to track
Re: Yow, Madduck!
On Fri, Jan 11, 2002 at 11:00:06AM -0500, dman wrote: On Fri, Jan 11, 2002 at 12:02:12AM -0500, Brenda J. Butler wrote: | Received: from bjb by seal with local (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) | id 16OtJ9-0004QT-00; Thu, 10 Jan 2002 23:28:47 -0500 | Received: from seal ([EMAIL PROTECTED] [209.151.2.114]) | by web30.achilles.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id XAA21655 | for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Thu, 10 Jan 2002 23:17:20 -0500 | Received: from web30.achilles.net (web30.achilles.net [209.151.0.6]) | by machine.remailer.address (Build 101 8.9.3/NT-8.9.3) with ESMTP id XAA09994 | for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Thu, 10 Jan 2002 23:31:03 -0500 | Received: from unknown (HELO machine.remailer.address) (206.99.235.25) | by samaria.achilles.net with SMTP; 11 Jan 2002 04:30:36 - | Received: (qmail 21575 invoked from network); 11 Jan 2002 04:30:36 - | Received: from pop1.achilles.net | by localhost with POP3 (fetchmail-5.3.3) | for [EMAIL PROTECTED] (single-drop); Thu, 10 Jan 2002 23:31:48 -0500 (EST) | Received: from localhost [127.0.0.1] (bjb) | by seal with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) | id 16OtM4-0004Rn-00; Thu, 10 Jan 2002 23:31:48 -0500 | Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | So machine.remailer.address thinks it is getting the message from | web30.achilles.net which can be resolved: should this be sufficient? Nope, it is telling you that your ISP is (partially) messed up :-). The purpose of the Received: headers are just to allow admins to track down what happened to a message so that configs can be debugged. Each system can be configured to put whatever it wants as a Received: header, or nothing at all. It is recommended to include the info, though, in case something goes wrong somewhere. Now I'm curious as to what [EMAIL PROTECTED] really means -- there is no domain remailer.address : I also can't find any name for that machine.remailer.address host. Each of those systems that handled the message after yours must know how to deliver to that address. Perhaps that is another sign of a misconfigured MTA -- did you really send the message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]? I should have warned you: [EMAIL PROTECTED] and machine.remailer.address are substitutions for the real strings. That is my permanent address and it only goes to people like relatives. Also it is not located at my isp, it is external. If I was to move to another city, [EMAIL PROTECTED] would remain the same, and I would reconfigure it to forward my mail to my new isp. So the misconfigured NT machine you talked about is at remailer.address, not at achilles.net. Actually achilles.net is a pretty cool isp. As for remailer.address, it is incoming-only, so I'm happy as long as my isp accepts mail for me from it in spite of its misconfiguration. Thanks. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] Welcome to the GNU age! http://www.gnu.org
Re: Yow, Madduck!
At 17:00 11.01.02, dman wrote: On Fri, Jan 11, 2002 at 12:02:12AM -0500, Brenda J. Butler wrote: ... | Received: from unknown (HELO machine.remailer.address) (206.99.235.25) | by samaria.achilles.net with SMTP; 11 Jan 2002 04:30:36 - I'd say that your ISP has its 'doze machine misconfigured because it claims it is machine.remailer.address but that name doesn't exist. The IP of the machine is 206.99.235.25. That system handed the message to samaria.achilles.net. The 'doze machine is the remailer which is broken. whois shows IEEE COMPUTER SOCiety (NETBLK-CW-206-99-234) CW-206-99-234 206.99.234.0 - 206.99.235.255 as netblock owner. samaria.achilles.net is the smtp server for Brenda's ISP. | Received: (qmail 21575 invoked from network); 11 Jan 2002 04:30:36 - qmail got the message next. Pretty sparse data here. I guess one would need to be familiar with qmail's operation to know what invoked from network means. Still, it doesn't say what machine or anything. AFAIK qmail is the smtp program of samaria.achilles.net. It puts the mail into the users (Brenda's) directory of the pop server program. Both are on same machine so no IP addresses are mentionned. | Received: from pop1.achilles.net | by localhost with POP3 (fetchmail-5.3.3) | for [EMAIL PROTECTED] (single-drop); Thu, 10 Jan 2002 23:31:48 -0500 (EST) Fetchmail on Brenda's box fetches the mail with POP3 and write its receive line. Her .fetchmailrc contains no smtpaddress field, user name is bjb, so it claims to fetch for [EMAIL PROTECTED] pop1.achilles.net and samaria.achilles.net are the same machine of her ISP. ... Nope, it is telling you that your ISP is (partially) messed up :-). Nope, the remailer is partially messed up. ... The purpose of the Received: headers are just to allow admins to track down what happened to a message so that configs can be debugged. Each system can be configured to put whatever it wants as a Received: header, or nothing at all. It is recommended to include the info, though, in case something goes wrong somewhere. Advanced users also need Received: headers to track down spammers. Bad luck if an open relay doesn't log IP addresses of senders. Greetings -- Volker Gerstenkorn Aus Lübeck kommt nicht nur Marzipan...
Re: Yow, Madduck!
On Fri, Jan 11, 2002 at 11:33:33AM -0500, Brenda J. Butler wrote: | On Fri, Jan 11, 2002 at 11:00:06AM -0500, dman wrote: | Now I'm curious as to what [EMAIL PROTECTED] really means -- there | is no domain remailer.address : | | I also can't find any name for that machine.remailer.address host. | Each of those systems that handled the message after yours must know | how to deliver to that address. Perhaps that is another sign of a | misconfigured MTA -- did you really send the message to | [EMAIL PROTECTED]? | | I should have warned you: [EMAIL PROTECTED] and | machine.remailer.address are substitutions for the real strings. Oh, ok, that explains why the lookups on my part failed. | Also it is not located at my isp, it is external. If I was to | move to another city, [EMAIL PROTECTED] would remain the same, | and I would reconfigure it to forward my mail to my new isp. | | So the misconfigured NT machine you talked about is at | remailer.address, not at achilles.net. Actually achilles.net | is a pretty cool isp. I assumed it was part of achilles.net's internal structure since the headers before and after it were all part of achilles.net. Now I see that achilles.net sent it on to that system, which sent it back (with a different envelope recipient) :-). | As for remailer.address, it is incoming-only, so I'm happy | as long as my isp accepts mail for me from it in spite of | its misconfiguration. Actually, you're kinda lucky that achilles.net accepted the forwarded message since the headers indicate that an unknown hostname was in the HELO. They could have denied it just as martin's system did to your debian box. (I assume you didn't change anything in the headers other than the name) -D -- Dishonest money dwindles away, but he who gathers money little by little makes it grow. Proverbs 13:11
Re: Yow, Madduck!
also sprach dman [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2002.01.11.1700 +0100]: Nex the system web30.achilles.net received the message vis ESMTP from a host who said it was 'seal' in the EHLO command, but whose IP is 209.151.2.114 which resolves to [EMAIL PROTECTED] (I didn't think the @ was legal in a hostname though, perhaps that is just something the MTA sticks in the header). it's an ident lookup in addition to a hostname lookup. | Received: (qmail 21575 invoked from network); 11 Jan 2002 04:30:36 | - qmail got the message next. Pretty sparse data here. I guess one would need to be familiar with qmail's operation to know what invoked from network means. Still, it doesn't say what machine or anything. SMTP. simple as that. DJB... oh well... | Or is the next Received header (Received: from unknown...) trying | to tell me something about my exim.conf? Nope, it is telling you that your ISP is (partially) messed up :-). any isp with 'doze machines is messed up! The purpose of the Received: headers are just to allow admins to track down what happened to a message so that configs can be debugged. Each system can be configured to put whatever it wants as a Received: header, or nothing at all. It is recommended to include the info, though, in case something goes wrong somewhere. a very nice feature of exim and sendmail btw. i wish postfix could rewrite the received headers. then i could put my crappy humour in there. -- martin; (greetings from the heart of the sun.) \ echo mailto: !#^.*|tr * mailto:; [EMAIL PROTECTED] echo '[dO%O+38%O+PO/d00]Fi22os0CC4BA64E418CE7l0xAP'|dc pgpepUa2qLzQr.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Yow, Madduck!
also sprach dman [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2002.01.11.1859 +0100]: Actually, you're kinda lucky that achilles.net accepted the forwarded message since the headers indicate that an unknown hostname was in the HELO. They could have denied it just as martin's system did to your debian box. (I assume you didn't change anything in the headers other than the name) if you run a smarthost as an ISP, you can't do that. any windoze machine will SMTP talk to you with the NetBIOS hostname, which is not FQDN. if you expect to have SMTP clients that aren't capable of SMTP or that aren't mail servers, you can't do what i am doing. -- martin; (greetings from the heart of the sun.) \ echo mailto: !#^.*|tr * mailto:; [EMAIL PROTECTED] i'd give my right arm to be ambidextrous. pgp0OksHmpskN.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Yow, Madduck!
also sprach Volker Gerstenkorn [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2002.01.11.1843 +0100]: Advanced users also need Received: headers to track down spammers. Bad luck if an open relay doesn't log IP addresses of senders. so then you take the relay's IP and blacklist them with rfc-ignorant.org or any of the RBL lists... Aus Lübeck kommt nicht nur Marzipan...A aha. sondern? ;) -- martin; (greetings from the heart of the sun.) \ echo mailto: !#^.*|tr * mailto:; [EMAIL PROTECTED] there are two major products that come out of berkeley: lsd and unix. we don't believe this to be a coincidence. -- jeremy s. anderson pgpT1qmuUGKNF.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Yow, Madduck!
On Fri, Jan 11, 2002 at 10:38:07PM +0100, martin f krafft wrote: | also sprach dman [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2002.01.11.1859 +0100]: | Actually, you're kinda lucky that achilles.net accepted the forwarded | message since the headers indicate that an unknown hostname was in the | HELO. They could have denied it just as martin's system did to your | debian box. (I assume you didn't change anything in the headers other | than the name) | | if you run a smarthost as an ISP, you can't do that. any windoze machine | will SMTP talk to you with the NetBIOS hostname, which is not FQDN. if | you expect to have SMTP clients that aren't capable of SMTP or that | aren't mail servers, you can't do what i am doing. Right (though I feel that SMTP clients incapable of SMTP are just plain wrong). However the ISP can restrict the hosts (ips) it allows the bad FQHNs from to be just the IPs it offers to customers. I got the impression, though, that machine.remailer.address is a system Brenda has that is not tied in with her current ISP. Thus the ISP doesn't have to allow invalid FQHNs from *it*. -D -- Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former. Albert Einstein
Re: Yow, Madduck!
also sprach dman [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2002.01.11.2336 +0100]: Right (though I feel that SMTP clients incapable of SMTP are just plain wrong). However the ISP can restrict the hosts (ips) it allows the bad FQHNs from to be just the IPs it offers to customers. yes, that's a good way to do it. then again, a good ISP will not have the smarthost be their MX... -- martin; (greetings from the heart of the sun.) \ echo mailto: !#^.*|tr * mailto:; [EMAIL PROTECTED] women who want to be equal to men lack imagination. pgpLgFVPZKwIr.pgp Description: PGP signature
Determining FQDN (was Re: Yow, Madduck!)
Lo, on Thursday, January 10, dman did write: SNIP One minor nit to pick from an otherwise very good explanation (and I wouldn't bother, except that I've been bitten by this before). This directive tells exim to use that name as the hostname in the SMTP greeting (HELO/EHLO) instead of that reported by the gethostbyname() C function (which returns the first thing after 127.0.0.1 in /etc/hosts). SNIP Not quite. gethostbyname() returns the host record for whatever name or address you supply as a parameter. I think, although I'm not actually certain, that by default, MTAs like exim use the machine's FQDN on the HELO/EHLO line. Finding the FQDN is a somewhat complicated process: 1) Find the machine's local hostname (e.g., in my case, ankh-morpork). This is stored in a kernel variable which root can set with hostname(1); it's initialized on boot from the contents of /etc/hostname. To check this value, run either `hostname' or `uname -n' from the command line, or use the uname(2) system call in a C program. (It'll be in the nodename field of the utsname struct.) 2) Pass this value to gethostbyname(3), which resolves it to an IP address, then determines the canonical hostname for that IP. This resolution and lookup follows the normal mechanism for host lookups: DNS, /etc/hosts, NIS, whatever (see /etc/nsswitch.conf and /etc/resolv.conf). This canonical hostname is the FQDN. I believe DNS records mark one of the hostnames as canonical; I would assume that NIS records have a similar ability. For lines in /etc/hosts, the first hostname on the line is considered canonical. So, the upshot of all this: * If you have a dynamic IP (ppp or dhcp), then you should have the following line in /etc/hosts: 127.0.0.1 HOSTNAME.DOMAIN.TLD HOSTNAME localhost replacing HOSTNAME, DOMAIN, and TLD with the appropriate values. This is what I do at work, since my IP is assigned via dhcp. * If you have a static IP, like I do at home, then you'll want the following lines in /etc/hosts: 127.0.0.1 localhost 1.2.3.4 HOSTNAME.DOMAIN.TLD HOSTNAME where 1.2.3.4 is your IP, and HOSTNAME, DOMAIN, and TLD are as above. In either situation, the order of the hostnames on the line *is* signficant! Richard
Re: Yow, Madduck!
On Thu, Jan 10, 2002 at 07:39:16PM -0500, Brenda J. Butler wrote: | On Thu, Jan 10, 2002 at 07:06:59PM -0500, Mail Delivery System wrote: |[EMAIL PROTECTED]: | SMTP error from remote mailer after RCPT TO:[EMAIL PROTECTED]: | host mail.madduck.net [195.226.187.154]: | 504 seal: | Helo command rejected: | need fully-qualified hostname | I don't have a domain. My isp has one but I don't. My | FQHN is seal (and it's not visible from the internet anyway). | I send mail from my mail client to local exim for delivery | next time I dial up. | | exim rewrites the reply-to, from, etc to have the achilles.net, | but I guess your software only looks at the original sender. | | Guess I can't email you then. This has nothing to do with your email address. An SMTP transfer looks like (numbered lines are from the remote system) : 220 dman.ddts.net ESMTP Exim 3.33 #1 Thu, 10 Jan 2002 21:29:31 -0500 HELO my host name 250 dman.ddts.net Hello dman at dman.ddts.net [127.0.0.1] MAIL FROM: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 250 [EMAIL PROTECTED] is syntactically correct RCPT TO: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 250 [EMAIL PROTECTED] is syntactically correct DATA 354 Enter message, ending with . on a line by itself From: dman [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: this is an email :-) Date: yeah, yeah this is the message body . 250 OK id=16OrSl-0001HR-00 QUIT 221 dman.ddts.net closing connection Connection closed by foreign host. I did this via telnet (but sent the message to myself, and rewrote the addresses above). The mail message is between DATA and .. The error you got is from HELO (or EHLO if you're using ESMTP as described by RFC2821). Clearly you are not using your ISPs system as a smarthost, but have setup exim to deliver directly to the remote system. What you need to do then, is report your machine with a fully qualified name. For example you might be able to get away with putting primary_host = achilles.net in your exim.conf. This directive tells exim to use that name as the hostname in the SMTP greeting (HELO/EHLO) instead of that reported by the gethostbyname() C function (which returns the first thing after 127.0.0.1 in /etc/hosts). The problem you might run into there is if another SMTP host rejects connections from machines whose name claimed by the HELO/EHLO command doesn't match the IP of the machine (verified via DNS). The next step you can take is to install the ddt-client package and sign up at ddts.net. Then you'll get a FQDN for yourself that will have an A record pointing to your IP when you're connected (and pointing to an unroutable IP while you're not). This works great for forward lookups (name-ip) but you don't get a reverse entry (ip-name). For example for my machine I have : $ host -a dman.ddts.net dman.ddts.net A 64.213.114.152 $ host -a 64.213.114.152 Name: 64-213-114-152.roc.frontiernet.net Address: 64.213.114.152 Now this whole problem you're having is not because we don't like you, but because spammers like to forge such data and we don't like them. =p. Just imagine, what would the world be like if people would treat others nicely ... ... ... Hmm, say, the next time you connect, see what IP you get and what happens if you try a reverse lookup of it : $ host ip also see if you can find out what hostname you were given (hopefully the reverse lookup will do that). Assuming your ISP hasn't been RBLed or some such, you should be able to set your name (as far as exim is concerned) to whatever name refers to your IP and then everything will work out nicely. -D -- the nice thing about windoze is - it does not just crash, it displays a dialog box and lets you press 'ok' first.
RE: Yow, Madduck!
If you're on a dialup link, why don't you use your ISP's mail server as a smart host? Let them take care of your mail delivery. j. -- Jeremy L. Gaddis [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Brenda J. Butler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2002 7:39 PM To: debian-user@lists.debian.org Subject: Yow, Madduck! Martin, I don't have a domain. My isp has one but I don't. My FQHN is seal (and it's not visible from the internet anyway). I send mail from my mail client to local exim for delivery next time I dial up. exim rewrites the reply-to, from, etc to have the achilles.net, but I guess your software only looks at the original sender. Guess I can't email you then. On Thu, Jan 10, 2002 at 07:06:59PM -0500, Mail Delivery System wrote: This message was created automatically by mail delivery software. A message that you sent could not be delivered to one or more of its recipients. The following address(es) failed: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: SMTP error from remote mailer after RCPT TO:[EMAIL PROTECTED]: host mail.madduck.net [195.226.187.154]: 504 seal: Helo command rejected: need fully-qualified hostname -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] Welcome to the GNU age! http://www.gnu.org -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Yow, Madduck!
also sprach Brenda J. Butler [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2002.01.11.0139 +0100]: I don't have a domain. My isp has one but I don't. My FQHN is seal (and it's not visible from the internet anyway). it's not FQHN then ;) FQ is fully-qualified, which requires a top-level domain. why not just make it seal.home? that will work... exim rewrites the reply-to, from, etc to have the achilles.net, but I guess your software only looks at the original sender. envelope/SMTP hostname in the HELO/EHLO line actually. it catches *a lot* of spammers (and some legit posters too). sorry! but as much as truth sucks, it also means that your exim isn't configured correctly. do you want a dynamic, globally accessible domain name? seal.pantsfullofunix.net? ;) i can give it to you along with a HMAC-MD5 certificate and a script to let you automatically and securely update my dynamic DNS zone for this purpose (TTL 2 minutes). then you just use that domain. Guess I can't email you then. :( the other thing you can do is simply identify your Exim in the SMTP session as something that resolves. your ISP's mail server for instance. AFAIK, this information is never used, it only appears in the Received headers... -- martin; (greetings from the heart of the sun.) \ echo mailto: !#^.*|tr * mailto:; [EMAIL PROTECTED] qvid me anxivs svm? pgpy2Vs33T5m2.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Yow, Madduck!
also sprach Jeremy L. Gaddis [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2002.01.11.0338 +0100]: If you're on a dialup link, why don't you use your ISP's mail server as a smart host? Let them take care of your mail delivery. that would be the proper way of doing it. or to get a dynamic host name... -- martin; (greetings from the heart of the sun.) \ echo mailto: !#^.*|tr * mailto:; [EMAIL PROTECTED] in the stage of grand illusion you walked into my life out of my dreams. -- david bowie pgpJ5QB0wsTji.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Yow, Madduck!
also sprach dman [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2002.01.11.0342 +0100]: 220 dman.ddts.net ESMTP Exim 3.33 #1 Thu, 10 Jan 2002 21:29:31 -0500 HELO my host name 250 dman.ddts.net Hello dman at dman.ddts.net [127.0.0.1] MAIL FROM: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 250 [EMAIL PROTECTED] is syntactically correct RCPT TO: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 250 [EMAIL PROTECTED] is syntactically correct DATA 354 Enter message, ending with . on a line by itself From: dman [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: this is an email :-) Date: yeah, yeah this is the message body . 250 OK id=16OrSl-0001HR-00 QUIT 221 dman.ddts.net closing connection Connection closed by foreign host. shouldn't i have gotten that message? or did you tweak Exim temporarily to not deliver it? I did this via telnet (but sent the message to myself, and rewrote the addresses above). h! The mail message is between DATA and .. The error you got is from HELO (or EHLO if you're using ESMTP as described by RFC2821). [omit rest of this excellent reply] dman and others, please consider my reply as invalid. it's funny that i wrote it before reading dman's post, and that we basically both say exactly the same things, but dman's is so much more articulate and researched. bow dman: do we actually have lives of our own, or do we live for [EMAIL PROTECTED] i kinda do these days :) it's fun though! -- martin; (greetings from the heart of the sun.) \ echo mailto: !#^.*|tr * mailto:; [EMAIL PROTECTED] wind catches lily, scattering petals to the ground. segmentation fault. pgpmT8K2nqX6S.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Yow, Madduck!
On Thu, Jan 10, 2002 at 09:42:28PM -0500, dman wrote: Clearly you are not using your ISPs system as a smarthost, but have setup exim to deliver directly to the remote system. What you need to Aha, correct. I think I'd like to use my isp as a smarthost. However, I have messed with my exim configuration and now I'm afraid to change it. the reverse lookup will do that). Assuming your ISP hasn't been RBLed I don't _think_ my ISP has been RBL'd and I suppose my name would be worse than mud if it got that way because of me. So I guess I'd better think about fixing my exim.conf. Here goes. Expect questions. Thanks! -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] Ottawa Linux Symposium: see http://www.linuxsymposium.org
Re: Yow, Madduck!
also sprach Brenda J. Butler [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2002.01.11.0511 +0100]: Aha, correct. I think I'd like to use my isp as a smarthost. However, I have messed with my exim configuration and now I'm afraid to change it. it's quite an easy change. i'll let you figure it out though ;) the reverse lookup will do that). Assuming your ISP hasn't been RBLed I don't _think_ my ISP has been RBL'd and I suppose my name would be worse than mud if it got that way because of me. So I guess I'd better think about fixing my exim.conf. Here goes. it's not RBLd. and you have a point. thanks! Expect questions. dman! dman, wake up! dman! -- martin; (greetings from the heart of the sun.) \ echo mailto: !#^.*|tr * mailto:; [EMAIL PROTECTED] it usually takes more than three weeks to prepare a good impromptu speech. -- mark twain pgpsbCibytQca.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Yow, Madduck!
On Thu, Jan 10, 2002 at 11:11:23PM -0500, Brenda J. Butler wrote: | On Thu, Jan 10, 2002 at 09:42:28PM -0500, dman wrote: | Clearly you are not using your ISPs system as a smarthost, but have | setup exim to deliver directly to the remote system. What you need to | | Aha, correct. I think I'd like to use my isp as a smarthost. | However, I have messed with my exim configuration and now I'm | afraid to change it. Put this in the ROUTERS section. Either put it above the existing literal and lookuphost routers or comment those out or both. # send mail to a smarthost smarthost: driver = domainlist transport = remote_smtp route_list = * your isp's server name bydns_a If you need to authenticate, find the part that says remote_smtp: driver = smtp authenticate_hosts = your smarthost server # To use SMTP AUTH when sending to a particular host, such as your ISP's # smarthost, uncomment and edit the above line, and also the example # client-side authenticators at the bottom of the file (right above DIRECTORS section). Do as the comments say. At the bottom of the file is where you provide your user/pass for authentication. Choose the appropriate method (based on what your ISP supports). You can telnet to it and issue an EHLO command to see what it support, or use trial-and-error. | the reverse lookup will do that). Assuming your ISP hasn't been RBLed | | I don't _think_ my ISP has been RBL'd and I suppose my name would | be worse than mud if it got that way because of me. :-). I don't think you'll cause that -- you're not on enough for spammers to take advantage of you even if you do have an open relay. The default config from 'eximconfig' is to accept locally destined mail only which doesn't help the spammers. Fortunately, too, the RBL isn't the end of the world for you. If you close the relay and stop spamming you can get off the list. -D -- An anxious heart weighs a man down, but a kind word cheers him up. Proverbs 12:25
Re: Yow, Madduck!
On Fri, Jan 11, 2002 at 05:33:50AM +0100, martin f krafft wrote: | Expect questions. | | dman! dman, wake up! dman! grin It's time for bed here. 11:51pm local time. (are you just getting up for work martin?) -D -- In the way of righteousness there is life; along that path is immortality. Proverbs 12:28
Re: Yow, Madduck!
On Thu, Jan 10, 2002 at 11:11:23PM -0500, Brenda J. Butler wrote: On Thu, Jan 10, 2002 at 09:42:28PM -0500, dman wrote: Clearly you are not using your ISPs system as a smarthost, but have setup exim to deliver directly to the remote system. What you need to Aha, correct. I think I'd like to use my isp as a smarthost. However, I have messed with my exim configuration and now I'm afraid to change it. the reverse lookup will do that). Assuming your ISP hasn't been RBLed I don't _think_ my ISP has been RBL'd and I suppose my name would be worse than mud if it got that way because of me. So I guess I'd better think about fixing my exim.conf. Here goes. Expect questions. Well, I had two drivers in the ROUTERS section, and smarthost was second with a route_list whose match-this-pattern was *. I moved it above lookuphost and it seems to work. Let's see if it keeps working and doesn't break anything else (not that I think exim tends to break, but I tend to break things when I mess with them). I had put it after lookuphost because I misunderstood the part in the exim manual that said A router like this should be the last one in the configuration file, since it will route any domain whatsoever. Oops. So that's the first part fixed: now I'm using my isp as a smarthost (and the isp even seems to accept it! Great!) The next part is to try to make the message come from something that can be resolved. Here are the Received headers from my email to myself (I sent it to an external mail re-director). From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thu Jan 10 23:31:55 2002 Received: from localhost [127.0.0.1] (bjb) by seal with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 16OtM4-0004Rn-00; Thu, 10 Jan 2002 23:31:48 -0500 Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Received: from pop1.achilles.net by localhost with POP3 (fetchmail-5.3.3) for [EMAIL PROTECTED] (single-drop); Thu, 10 Jan 2002 23:31:48 -0500 (EST) Received: (qmail 21575 invoked from network); 11 Jan 2002 04:30:36 - Received: from unknown (HELO machine.remailer.address) (206.99.235.25) by samaria.achilles.net with SMTP; 11 Jan 2002 04:30:36 - Received: from web30.achilles.net (web30.achilles.net [209.151.0.6]) by machine.remailer.address (Build 101 8.9.3/NT-8.9.3) with ESMTP id XAA09994 for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Thu, 10 Jan 2002 23:31:03 -0500 Received: from seal ([EMAIL PROTECTED] [209.151.2.114]) by web30.achilles.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id XAA21655 for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Thu, 10 Jan 2002 23:17:20 -0500 Received: from bjb by seal with local (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 16OtJ9-0004QT-00; Thu, 10 Jan 2002 23:28:47 -0500 So machine.remailer.address thinks it is getting the message from web30.achilles.net which can be resolved: should this be sufficient? Or is the next Received header (Received: from unknown...) trying to tell me something about my exim.conf? -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] Welcome to the GNU age! http://www.gnu.org
Re: Yow, Madduck!
also sprach Brenda J. Butler [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2002.01.11.0602 +0100]: So machine.remailer.address thinks it is getting the message from web30.achilles.net which can be resolved: should this be sufficient? Or is the next Received header (Received: from unknown...) trying to tell me something about my exim.conf? i don't know exim really, but as long as From and Return-Path are right, you need not worry. the Received headers are really only cosmetic. anyway, please don't CC me on list replies. i am off to bed for a while. see you soon. -- martin; (greetings from the heart of the sun.) \ echo mailto: !#^.*|tr * mailto:; [EMAIL PROTECTED] linux is like a wigwam. no gates, no windoze, and an apache inside. pgpGUPbhIFtvW.pgp Description: PGP signature
RE: Yow, Madduck!
The only problem with that is that people start
using myhost.dynamic-dns-provider.com as their
domain name for email. That's not bad in and of
itself, except when they're on a dialup modem
link and {dis|re}connect often. The DNS RR's
get updated often, mail servers cache them, and
try to connect to the wrong IP. Mail gets queued
and backed up, etc. etc.
The smart host is definitely the way to go.
j.
--
Jeremy L. Gaddis [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Original Message-
From: martin f krafft [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2002 10:38 PM
To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: Yow, Madduck!
also sprach Jeremy L. Gaddis [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2002.01.11.0338
+0100]:
If you're on a dialup link, why don't you use your
ISP's mail server as a smart host? Let them take
care of your mail delivery.
that would be the proper way of doing it. or to get a dynamic host
name...
--
martin; (greetings from the heart of the sun.)
\ echo mailto: !#^.*|tr * mailto:; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
in the stage of grand illusion
you walked into my life
out of my dreams.
-- david bowie
