If you specify explicitly a mail gateway, MX record usage does not make
any sense.
You must see the mail gateway you define as 'hard-coding' the MTA you
want to use, that skips any usage of dynamically defined MX record.
Thx, Eric
On 05/10/2012 06:28 PM, Cole Ferrier wrote:
Ahh, i think i've figured out the problem..
We have a requirement to smarthost (transfer all mail through an internal
mail relay). so we have set the Mail Gateway up in our remotedelivery
mailet.
org.apache.james.transport.mailets.RemoteDeliverydeliver.deliver(Mail mail,
Session session)
then in the mailet:
if (gatewayServer == null) {
MailAddress rcpt = (MailAddress)
recipients.iterator().next();
String host = rcpt.getHost();
//Lookup the possible targets
targetServers =
getMailetContext().getSMTPHostAddresses(host);
if (!targetServers.hasNext()) {
log("No mail server found for: " + host);
StringBuffer exceptionBuffer =
new StringBuffer(128)
.append("There are no DNS entries for the hostname
")
.append(host)
.append(". I cannot determine where to send this
message.");
return failMessage(mail, new
MessagingException(exceptionBuffer.toString()), false);
}
} else {
targetServers = getGatewaySMTPHostAddresses(gatewayServer);
}
we have a gateway server so it goes into the else clause of this block,
because it doesn't have to find the mail servers responsible for the
domains of the recipients, and it just calls
getGatewaySMTPHostAddresses(gatewayServer);
which returns an iterator that just loops through
final InetAddress[] ips =
org.apache.james.dnsserver.DNSServer.getAllByName(nextGateway);
which are just all the DNS entries (not MX records) for the gateway server.
This is why when i turned up logging to DEBUG on the DNSServer component, i
didn't get any meaningful data.
So it looks like i have a requirement that i still want MX records to be
evaluated while using a mail gateway. Does that make sense?
Could i just change this block of code to always call the
//Lookup the possible targets
targetServers =
getMailetContext().getSMTPHostAddresses(host);
method?
Or?
Thoughts?
Cole
On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 3:40 AM, Eric Charles<[email protected]> wrote:
Quick addon if finally the issue is in james code, and further to Ioan's
point on JIRA, the patch to backport on 2.3 could be
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/**james/server/trunk/dnsservice-**
dnsjava/src/main/java/org/**apache/james/dnsservice/**
dnsjava/DNSJavaService.java?**r1=1035437&r2=1035436&pathrev=**1035437<http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/james/server/trunk/dnsservice-dnsjava/src/main/java/org/apache/james/dnsservice/dnsjava/DNSJavaService.java?r1=1035437&r2=1035436&pathrev=1035437>
Thx, Eric
On 05/10/2012 11:30 AM, Stefano Bagnara wrote:
2012/5/9 Cole Ferrier<[email protected]>:
Recycle of James did not work, it is still equally using all 6 of the
mail
servers, even though they are at a different preference levels.
Any Ideas?
I think you have issues at DNS level.
AFAIK james 2.3 had some bug in MX ordering but I remember only two of
them, and they do not break priority the way you see.
1) If james is a relay server for a domain it doesn't take care to
only relay to "lower priority" servers resulting into loops if the
high priority servers are not available (this is not your case).
2) James does sort MX hosts, but uses a comparator that is not
"consistent with equals"
(http://docs.oracle.com/**javase/1.4.2/docs/api/java/**
util/Comparator.html<http://docs.oracle.com/javase/1.4.2/docs/api/java/util/Comparator.html>
).
This is not necessarily a bad thing as it will correctly sort results
using the priority but often will return servers with the same
priority "not shuffled": more often than not, MX are already shuffled
on the DNS side so this doesn't have a big impact (and is not your
case).
So check what DNS servers your james is using and make sure that very
specific DNS servers have updated informations.
Stefano
Cole
On Tue, May 8, 2012 at 3:03 PM, Cole Ferrier<[email protected]>
wrote:
talking with our internal mail system people, all 6 servers had a
priority
of 10 the last time apache James was restarted.
Does James cache this data for the life of it running? or is there a
time
to live? or?
I will schedule a recycle of james to see if it stops using the servers
that now have a lower preference.
Let me know if you have any ideas in the mean time.
Cole
On Tue, May 8, 2012 at 9:42 AM, Cole Ferrier<[email protected]>
wrote:
We have an internal mail system that has 6 MX records 3 at priority 10
(new servers recently added) and 3 at priority 20 (old servers that
where
previously at 10).
and it appears that apache james 2.3 is sending mail to all of them
about
equally?
i was instructed that it should only connect to the 20's when all of
the
10s are unavailable?
any help would be appreciated?
(or is there any need to restart James? aka, how long does it cache its
data about the MX preferences?)
Cole
------------------------------**------------------------------**---------
To unsubscribe, e-mail:
server-user-unsubscribe@james.**apache.org<[email protected]>
For additional commands, e-mail:
[email protected].**org<[email protected]>
--
eric | http://about.echarles.net | @echarles
------------------------------**------------------------------**---------
To unsubscribe, e-mail:
server-user-unsubscribe@james.**apache.org<[email protected]>
For additional commands, e-mail:
[email protected].**org<[email protected]>
--
eric | http://about.echarles.net | @echarles
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
