Sandy Drobic wrote: > Joe Morris (NTM) wrote: > >> jmorris:/home/joe # postconf inet_interfaces >> inet_interfaces = 127.0.0.1 ::1 > > Okay, now the question is, what IP address of the server was used to > submit the mail. If only localhost is enabled for Postfix, then it's > clear that the mail could only be sent from the server itself. > > Or was the mail submitted with the sendmail binary via command line? > It shows in your log with "postfix/pickup" as the first entry of the > mail. > I think you may be on to something here. In my /etc/hosts, my local domain, i.e jmorris.home is defined as 192.168.10.1. The mailing program (dshield iptables script) uses /usr/sbin/sendmail -oi -t to send its mail. The logs showed: Nov 7 19:30:02 jmorris postfix/pickup[28444]: 639CC26F0DF: uid=1000 from=<joe> Nov 7 19:30:02 jmorris postfix/cleanup[30908]: 639CC26F0DF: message-id=<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Nov 7 19:30:02 jmorris postfix/qmgr[28445]: 639CC26F0DF: from=<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, size=21437, nrcpt=1 (queue active) Nov 7 19:30:19 jmorris postfix/smtp[30913]: 639CC26F0DF: to=<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, relay=smtp.postoffice.net[165.212.11.125]:2525, delay=17, delays=0.53/0.01/16/0.33, dsn=5.0.0, status=bounced (host smtp.postoffice.net[165.212.11.125] said: 553 Invalid sender domain (in reply to MAIL FROM command))
So maybe for some reason you may be able to explain to me (cause I otherwise do not know why it used jmorris.home instead of localhost by using the sendmail command but you must since you asked :-) ) and if I had added 192.168.10.1 to my local inet_interfaces, sender_canonical would have worked, is that correct? >> postfix-2.3_20051106-0.1 > > Ah, that's a snapshot version from last year. Did you compile from > source or did you use a rpm? I used an rpm from people directory, but that is a different machine than the one I am working on presently (but that server is why I do all my testing on my home machine). > The headers you showed were from a bounce message, and they were part > of the body of the mail, not within the header of the mails itself. The log for the mail is above. Since it was never actually sent, but rejected by my relayhost, I cannot tell where the header was. > > If you have a content_filter like amavisd-new, every mail will be seen > by cleanup twice. Once before the content_filter, and after the > content_filter sends the mail back to Postfix. So even headers added > by the content_filter should be rewritten, when the mails is > resubmitted from the content_filter. Just to summarize a bit, am I correct that sender_canonical did NOT work because I had misconfigured my local inet addresses for postfix purposes? And that is somehow connected to using sendmail to send the mail from the script? And, most importantly to me ATM, that if I had added 192.168.10.1 to my inet_interfaces, sender_canonical would have worked (and therefore there is not a bug in Yast MTA module)? Thanks much for all your help here. -- Joe Morris Registered Linux user 231871 -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
