Matt wrote: >> ISTR the version you show above does not call-out to the connecting host >> at all. >> >> But in the OP you cited a rejection OF the far-end BY your server. >> >> That sounds like you ARE doing a callout. > > No callouts, that gets you black listed.
Agreed - or it *may* do. In any case, best reserved for use between/among an affinity group or pool of servers under common/cooperative control. So that clause is essentially a 'red herring', not the cause. > Unless you call a DNS look > up of the sending email address domain a call out and thats all its > doing. Those are fine - they don't ordinarily reach the sending server anyway - only the nearest up-to-date nameserver. HOWEVER - you may need to: - allow for slow / failed response AND/OR - replace dodgy nameservers with better ones. AND/OR - run a local caching, recursing DNS that can keep the records asked for up-to-date between erratic responses. AND/OR - add a commonly-accessed but problematic far-end to /etc/hosts NB: We do all of the above... > When its not working a "dig there_domain mx" results in > SERVFAIL so I am still guessing the error Dnsstuff reports something > about cnames in the mx records is the trouble. > > Matt > It certainly is not 'optimal' - but Exim is less pedantic about such things than bespoke DNS checking tools. BTW - do the records in question (also) have abnormally short ttl's? Bill -- ## List details at http://lists.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users ## Exim details at http://www.exim.org/ ## Please use the Wiki with this list - http://wiki.exim.org/
