On Fri, Jan 11, 2002 at 05:05:42PM -0600, Richard Cobbe wrote:
| Lo, on Thursday, January 10, dman did write:
|
|
|
| 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
Lo, on Thursday, January 10, dman did write:
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 report
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 i
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
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 R
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 ass
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 hos
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.ad
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 misconfi
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] [20
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 brea
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-qualifi
, 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 del
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 som
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'
On Fri, Jan 11, 2002 at 05:33:50AM +0100, martin f krafft wrote:
| > Expect questions.
|
| dman! dman, wake up! dman!
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 immortalit
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'
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
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 con
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
> 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: <[EMA
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;
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 mak
y 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 u
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 :
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 o
25 matches
Mail list logo
