Thanks Scott.  I figured Symantec were at fault here, since we had no issues
with this before.  Perhaps they've fixed this with v7 of their software.  I
know their smtp proxy received some attention.

Josh

----- Original Message -----
From: "R. Scott Perry" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, August 15, 2002 4:03 PM
Subject: Re: [IMail Forum] mx rollover issue


>
> >umoncton.ca     MX preference = 20, mail exchanger = cujam.ci.umoncton.ca
> >umoncton.ca     MX preference = 10, mail exchanger =
altair.ci.umoncton.ca
> >
> >cujam.ci.umoncton.ca    internet address = 139.103.2.10
> >altair.ci.umoncton.ca   internet address = 139.103.2.3
> >
> >Our logs show attempts to connect to 139.103.2.3 only.  Interestingly, I
> >cannot telnet to 139.103.2.3, but I can to 139.103.2.10.
>
> Here, I can not connect to 139.103.2.3.  I'm guessing umoncton.ca is one
of
> these extremely poorly designed domains that intentionally has a wasteful
> MX record that goes nowhere (read: they have clueless admins).
>
> >Symantec's knowledgebase has an entry on mx rollover issues, and blames
the
> >smtp server.  It states: "Some mail servers will not roll over to the
second
> >MX record because they do not properly interpret the 421 SMTP error
message
> >returned by the firewall. The mail server believes it has already made a
> >successful connection with the remote mail server when it has only
> >communicated with the Raptor Firewall's SMTP proxy. The SMTP server will
not
> >even try the second MX record."
>
> The problem here is with Symantec.  They are translating umoncton.ca's
"You
> aren't allowed to connect here" (which IMail properly handles as a "try
the
> next MX record" response) into "The server is shutting down -- please try
> again before contacting the next MX record).
>
> In this case, Symantec is definitely in the wrong.  See
> http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg48276.html
for
> more details on this Symantec problem (from February -- 6 months later,
> they still haven't fixed their problem).
>
> 421 specifically indicates a *temporary* error per the RFCs -- Symantec is
> returning this when there is an error that is permanent.
>
>                                                     -Scott
> ---
> Declude: Anti-virus, Anti-spam and Anti-hijacking solutions for
> IMail.  http://www.declude.com
>
> ---
> [This E-mail was scanned for viruses by Declude Virus
(http://www.declude.com)]
>
>
> To Unsubscribe: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html
> List Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/
> Knowledge Base/FAQ: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/IMail/
> ---
> [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]
>
>

---
[This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]


To Unsubscribe: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html
List Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/
Knowledge Base/FAQ: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/IMail/

Reply via email to