Re: SMTP question
On Monday, 08/20/2007 at 10:51 EDT, "Huegel, Thomas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I have SMTP mail server set up and am using the IPMAILERADDRESS ALL > xx.xx.xx.xx to route mail to the company mail server. This works fine for > sending mail from CMS to anyplace, the problem is I can't receive mail from the > outside. Is there something more I have to do in the z/VM configuration? or did > the postmaster not set me up correctly? As long as TCPIP DATA has the correct HOSTNAME and DOMAINORIGIN entries, SMTP should be able to deliver to you. The inbound mail must be addressed as @. OR @. The latter assumes you have configured ALTTCPHOSTNAME in SMTP CONFIG. Watching the SMTP console will typically give you an idea of what is happening. You may need to turn on some traces. If you telnet to your SMTP server and enter an SMTP transaction, you can tell if the SMTP server is configured correctly. In the example here, I did it from CMS. TCPIP DATA contains: HOSTNAME SAMPLE DOMAINORIGIN TEST.COM ALTTCPHOSTNAME is not configured. If this works, and mail is delivered to your RDR, then SMTP is ok and the problem is elsewhere. telnet loopback 25 220 SAMPLE.TEST.COM running IBM VM SMTP Level 530... HELO this.is.me 250 SAMPLE.TEST.COM is my domain name. mail from: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 250 OK rcpt to: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 250 OK DATA 354 Enter mail body. End by new line with just a '.' testing testing 1 2 3 . 250 Mail Delivered QUIT 221 SAMPLE.TEST.COM running IBM VM SMTP Level 530 closing connection Alan Altmark z/VM Development IBM Endicott
Re: SMTP question
If your company mail server is the only externally visible one, then they need to do some configuration on their side to a) indicate that they are the MX (mail exchanger) for your mainframe host, and b) configure their mail daemon to deliver mail intended for your system to the SMTP on the mainframe. Unfortunately, how to accomplish both tasks is specific to the software on the company mail server, so we'd need to know what it is to tell you more. From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Huegel, Thomas Sent: Monday, August 20, 2007 10:50 AM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: SMTP question Good morning all. I have a quick question about SMTP. I have SMTP mail server set up and am using the IPMAILERADDRESS ALL xx.xx.xx.xx to route mail to the company mail server. This works fine for sending mail from CMS to anyplace, the problem is I can't receive mail from the outside. Is there something more I have to do in the z/VM configuration? or did the postmaster not set me up correctly? Thanks Tpm __ << ella for Spam Control >> has removed VSE-List messages and set aside VM-List for me You can use it too - and it's FREE! http://www.ellaforspam.com
SMTP question
Good morning all. I have a quick question about SMTP. I have SMTP mail server set up and am using the IPMAILERADDRESS ALL xx.xx.xx.xx to route mail to the company mail server. This works fine for sending mail from CMS to anyplace, the problem is I can't receive mail from the outside. Is there something more I have to do in the z/VM configuration? or did the postmaster not set me up correctly? Thanks Tpm __ << ella for Spam Control >> has removed VSE-List messages and set aside VM-List for me You can use it too - and it's FREE! http://www.ellaforspam.com
Re: SMTP question
Thanks. I looked through the manual and didn't see that. Steve Miguel Delapaz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent by: The IBM z/VM Operating System 10/27/2006 02:43 PM Please respond to The IBM z/VM Operating System To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU cc: Subject: Re: SMTP question Specify SUPPRESSNOTIFICATION in your SMTP CONFIG file I believe that support was added in z/VM 4.4.0 If you're on z/VM 5.1.0 or later, you can specify RECEIVED, DELIVERED, or ALL after SUPPRESSNOTIFICATION to have a bit more control over which messages you suppress Regards, Miguel Delapaz z/VM TCP/IP Development The IBM z/VM Operating System wrote on 10/27/2006 12:23:03 PM: > > Hello. When I send an email from the mainframe via SMTP, I > eventually get a message back from > SMTP saying that the mail has been delivered to whomever I > originally sent the email. > Is there a way I can suppress this message? > Thanks, > > Steve G.
Re: SMTP question
Specify SUPPRESSNOTIFICATION in your SMTP CONFIG file I believe that support was added in z/VM 4.4.0 If you're on z/VM 5.1.0 or later, you can specify RECEIVED, DELIVERED, or ALL after SUPPRESSNOTIFICATION to have a bit more control over which messages you suppress Regards, Miguel Delapaz z/VM TCP/IP Development The IBM z/VM Operating System wrote on 10/27/2006 12:23:03 PM: > > Hello. When I send an email from the mainframe via SMTP, I > eventually get a message back from > SMTP saying that the mail has been delivered to whomever I > originally sent the email. > Is there a way I can suppress this message? > Thanks, > > Steve G.
SMTP question
Hello. When I send an email from the mainframe via SMTP, I eventually get a message back from SMTP saying that the mail has been delivered to whomever I originally sent the email. Is there a way I can suppress this message? Thanks, Steve G.
Re: another SMTP question - IPMAILERNAME instead of IPMAILERADDRESS -
On Wednesday, 06/21/2006 at 10:15 EST, Ed Zell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > z/VM 5.1 and 5.2 customers will be interested in APAR PK07003. > Any chance that this APAR will be fitted back on to z/VM 4.4? It > would be great to get rid of the copy of TCPIP DATA that is on > the SMTP machine today and use IPMAILERADDRESS ALL .. No, sorry. Alan Altmark z/VM Development IBM Endicott
AW: another SMTP question - IPMAILERNAME instead of IPMAILERADDRESS -
Thank you ! for all the help and comments. I have installed APAR PK07003 this morning. It works fine with hostname. kindest regards Horst Rempel -Ursprüngliche Nachricht- Von: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Auftrag von Alan Altmark Gesendet: Mittwoch, 21. Juni 2006 15:13 An: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Betreff: Re: another SMTP question - IPMAILERNAME instead of IPMAILERADDRESS - z/VM 5.1 and 5.2 customers will be interested in APAR PK07003. It adds two things: - IPMAILERADDRESS ALL (you no longer need the DNS hack) - IPMAILERADDRESS hostname (incl. the LIST option) >-IPMAILERADDRESS-+-+-+-+-ip_address-+---+> | | | || | '-ALL-' | '-hostname---' | | | '-' | | ..| | ||| | v|| '-LIST---+-ip_address-+-+-ENDIPMAILERADDRESS-' || '-hostname---' I will warn you up front that "hostname" is resolved only once. If the IP address changes, you have to issue SMSG commands to reprocess the queue. I like IPMAILERADDRESS ALL the best and use it to point to my Linux gateway that, as you point out, has much better capability. Alan Altmark z/VM Development IBM Endicott
Re: another SMTP question - IPMAILERNAME instead of IPMAILERADDRESS -
> z/VM 5.1 and 5.2 customers will be interested in APAR PK07003. > It adds two things: > - IPMAILERADDRESS ALL (you no longer need the DNS hack) > - IPMAILERADDRESS hostname (incl. the LIST option) Any chance that this APAR will be fitted back on to z/VM 4.4? It would be great to get rid of the copy of TCPIP DATA that is on the SMTP machine today and use IPMAILERADDRESS ALL .. Thanks. Ed Zell Illinois Mutual Life (309) 674-8255 x-107 . CONFIDENTIAL NOTICE: This communication, including any attachments, is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed and contains information which may be confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, any distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, notify the sender immediately, delete the communication and destroy all copies. Thank you for your compliance.
Re: another SMTP question - IPMAILERNAME instead of IPMAILERADDRESS -
> z/VM 5.1 and 5.2 customers will be interested in APAR PK07003. It adds > two things: > - IPMAILERADDRESS ALL (you no longer need the DNS hack) > - IPMAILERADDRESS hostname (incl. the LIST option) > >-IPMAILERADDRESS-+-+-+-+-ip_address-+---+> > | | | || | > '-ALL-' | '-hostname---' | > | | > '-' | > | ..| > | ||| > | v|| > '-LIST---+-ip_address-+-+-ENDIPMAILERADDRESS-' > || > '-hostname---' > Nifty-keen! Thanks, Uncle Chuckie! -- db
Re: another SMTP question - IPMAILERNAME instead of IPMAILERADDRESS -
On Wednesday, 06/21/2006 at 06:28 AST, David Boyes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > In the books I cant't find a smt config configuration statement that > allows me to > > use ipmailername instead of a ipmaileraddress. Is there a way to do it > anyhow ??? > > Not that I know of, or at least not with the VM SMTP code. The way > IPMAILERADDRESS is implemented, you have to turn off DNS resolution for > SMTP in order to force VM SMTP to deliver everything consistently to the > IPMAILERADDRESS destination rather than trying to deliver it directly to > the final destination. When you turn off DNS resolution, you lose the > ability to use a name instead of the IP address. Several of us have > reported this as a bug in the past, but it's never bubbled up to the > surface as important enough to fix, as it's documented to work this way. z/VM 5.1 and 5.2 customers will be interested in APAR PK07003. It adds two things: - IPMAILERADDRESS ALL (you no longer need the DNS hack) - IPMAILERADDRESS hostname (incl. the LIST option) >-IPMAILERADDRESS-+-+-+-+-ip_address-+---+> | | | || | '-ALL-' | '-hostname---' | | | '-' | | ..| | ||| | v|| '-LIST---+-ip_address-+-+-ENDIPMAILERADDRESS-' || '-hostname---' I will warn you up front that "hostname" is resolved only once. If the IP address changes, you have to issue SMSG commands to reprocess the queue. I like IPMAILERADDRESS ALL the best and use it to point to my Linux gateway that, as you point out, has much better capability. Alan Altmark z/VM Development IBM Endicott
Re: another SMTP question - IPMAILERNAME instead of IPMAILERADDRESS -
> But our network people advised me, that I should not hardcode the ip-address and use > an ip-name instead. Good advice. It's only been 30 years since the introduction of the DNS; it's about time we got past hardcoded IP addresses *anywhere*. > In the books I cant't find a smt config configuration statement that allows me to > use ipmailername instead of a ipmaileraddress. Is there a way to do it anyhow ??? Not that I know of, or at least not with the VM SMTP code. The way IPMAILERADDRESS is implemented, you have to turn off DNS resolution for SMTP in order to force VM SMTP to deliver everything consistently to the IPMAILERADDRESS destination rather than trying to deliver it directly to the final destination. When you turn off DNS resolution, you lose the ability to use a name instead of the IP address. Several of us have reported this as a bug in the past, but it's never bubbled up to the surface as important enough to fix, as it's documented to work this way. Your best option is to use a Linux guest on an internal VSWITCH or GLAN using private address space (eg 192.168.x.x) as your IPMAILERADDRESS destination in VM SMTP, and have the Linux guest do the delivery to Exchange/Outlook. The Linux SMTP servers permit use of a DNS name as their smart host (and a whole lot more). -- db
another SMTP question - IPMAILERNAME instead of IPMAILERADDRESS -
Title: another SMTP question - IPMAILERNAME instead of IPMAILERADDRESS - hello VMers, we are sending CMS-files via SMTP to our OUTLOOK mailserver. I have definied the OUTLOOK mailsever in the SMTP CONFIG with the IPMAILERADDRESS statement. Everything works fine. But our network people advised me, that I should not hardcode the ip-address and use an ip-name instead. In the books I cant't find a smt config configuration statement that allows me to use ipmailername instead of a ipmaileraddress. Is there a way to do it anyhow ??? We are running zVM520 and zVM440. kindest regards, mit freundlichen Grüßen, Horst Rempel Systemprogrammierung BG Chemie Heidelberg Germany
Re: SMTP question
> The trouble with SMTP is that the E-Mail sender is > (usually) not verifiable. If you are just using NOTES > to relay out to the Internet this shouldn't be an > issue. However if you are going to allow Notes <=> VM > then it can be an issue for the Notes users. I think > the moral is that even on internal systems only trust > digitally signed e-mails, and then only if you trust > the PKI. Another good reason to use a Linux guest for this. It's relatively straightforward to add headers supplying the originating spool info with the modern Linux SMTP MTAs (we did it in SMTPPLUS as part of the spool support, so I know it can be done w/o lots of rocket science), and there are fairly easy ways to determine if the purported originating ID actually exists in the CP directory and dump the message if the originator is bogus. You also pick up SMTP authorization, transport encryption, endpoint authentication, Kerberos support...etc, etc, etc all the things that VM SMTP never got taught to do. -- db
Re: SMTP question
You need to be *very* careful that you don’t end up opening the Notes SMTP server up as an open mail relay, which is really, REALLY easy to do (and guaranteed to get you into every spam blocking database in the world, which is very difficult to undo). The Notes SMTP implementation is not particularly robust about whom it allows to relay, nor is it very high-performance compared to other MTAs out there. You are far better off using a Linux guest or a external Intel Linux box with a modern exim or postfix implementation as the smarthost for both VM SMTP *and* Notes, and implementing relaying from there. It’s more secure, offers better control, and you can add spam/virus scanning for both incoming and outgoing mail for little or no cost (especially cheap if you use the Intel box and don’t burn 390 cycles on spam/virus scanning). To answer your original question: yes, it is technically possible. The question of whether you’d *want* to is a whole different animal. David Boyes Sine Nomine Associates From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Steve Gentry Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2006 6:16 PM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: SMTP question We are trying to figure out if we can use Lotus NOTES relay email from VM out to the internet. We would send the correct info to SMTP, SMTP would forward it on to NOTES and NOTES would send it out to the internet. Is this type of thing doable with VM (5.2) and NOTES? Thanks. Steve G.
Re: SMTP question
> We had to quit using it, however, because our > auditors were able to break > into it and it looked like it would take an exit to > stop them; and it > wasn't worth that. There were also other issues > around the corner > involving validation of the VM email sender. It > just got too messy for > what it would have bought us. > The trouble with SMTP is that the E-Mail sender is (usually) not verifiable. If you are just using NOTES to relay out to the Internet this shouldn't be an issue. However if you are going to allow Notes <=> VM then it can be an issue for the Notes users. I think the moral is that even on internal systems only trust digitally signed e-mails, and then only if you trust the PKI. > And, in response to Dave Wade, you might want to > take this indirect route > if your VM system doesn't have direct access to the > Internet. Using NOTES in this way seems a bit of a sledge hammer to crack a nut, but I guess if you already have NOTES on the internet its a good start. Trouble is that if I had NOTES on the internet, I would make sure the bridge head MTA (thats the one that talks SMTP) was not visible to the internal network via SMTP, only via Notes protocols, to minimize the spoofing mentioned above... > > Dennis Schaffer > Dave. __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: SMTP question
Steve, Yes, we did just that for a little while. You need to configure TCPIP 198 file SMTP CONFIG parameter IPMAILERADDRESS with the IP address of your Notes MTA (I'm not sure what that stands for but its the Notes server which receives non-Notes email) server and VM SMTP will forward any non-local email to that address. Its then becomes that server's responsibility to forward it outside the company. We had to quit using it, however, because our auditors were able to break into it and it looked like it would take an exit to stop them; and it wasn't worth that. There were also other issues around the corner involving validation of the VM email sender. It just got too messy for what it would have bought us. And, in response to Dave Wade, you might want to take this indirect route if your VM system doesn't have direct access to the Internet. Dennis Schaffer
Re: SMTP question
Why do you want to send via notes instead of direct? --- Steve Gentry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > We are trying to figure out if we can use Lotus > NOTES relay email from > VM out to the internet. > We would send the correct info to SMTP, SMTP would > forward it on to NOTES > and NOTES > would send it out to the internet. > Is this type of thing doable with VM (5.2) and > NOTES? > Thanks. > Steve G. __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
SMTP question
We are trying to figure out if we can use Lotus NOTES relay email from VM out to the internet. We would send the correct info to SMTP, SMTP would forward it on to NOTES and NOTES would send it out to the internet. Is this type of thing doable with VM (5.2) and NOTES? Thanks. Steve G.
