Brian a...@cityscape.co.uk writes:
On Tue 21 Oct 2014 at 22:54:19 +0200, lee wrote:
Brian a...@cityscape.co.uk writes:
On Sun 19 Oct 2014 at 01:19:51 +0200, lee wrote:
At least they are supporting others in breaking RFCs, and I wonder how
that could not be against their own
Brian a...@cityscape.co.uk writes:
[I may be misunderstanding how your mail system works but your Date:
header doesn't look right]
On Sun 19 Oct 2014 at 00:53:44 +0200, lee wrote:
Brian a...@cityscape.co.uk writes:
On Fri 17 Oct 2014 at 03:15:49 +0200, lee wrote:
There is no
Brian a...@cityscape.co.uk writes:
On Sun 19 Oct 2014 at 01:19:51 +0200, lee wrote:
At least they are supporting others in breaking RFCs, and I wonder how
that could not be against their own interests. In any case, it
classifies them as (at least potentially very) unreliable.
This is
On Mon 20 Oct 2014 at 21:19:05 +0200, lee wrote:
Brian a...@cityscape.co.uk writes:
[I may be misunderstanding how your mail system works but your Date:
header doesn't look right]
On Sun 19 Oct 2014 at 00:53:44 +0200, lee wrote:
Brian a...@cityscape.co.uk writes:
On Fri 17
On Tue 21 Oct 2014 at 22:54:19 +0200, lee wrote:
Brian a...@cityscape.co.uk writes:
On Sun 19 Oct 2014 at 01:19:51 +0200, lee wrote:
At least they are supporting others in breaking RFCs, and I wonder how
that could not be against their own interests. In any case, it
classifies them
On Sun, 19 Oct 2014 16:37:13 +0100
Brian a...@cityscape.co.uk wrote:
primary_hostname is used as the HELO but Debian doesn't set it. Also,
the exim maintainers aren't very keen on your using it in a
configuration file.
Many mail servers have a public IP address, and it makes sense to
Brian a...@cityscape.co.uk writes:
On Fri 17 Oct 2014 at 03:15:49 +0200, lee wrote:
Brian a...@cityscape.co.uk writes:
On Mon 13 Oct 2014 at 04:12:04 +0200, lee wrote:
Jonathan Dowland j...@debian.org writes:
On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 02:45:44PM -0400, Harry Putnam wrote:
And
Joe j...@jretrading.com writes:
On Sat, 18 Oct 2014 00:13:54 +0100
Brian a...@cityscape.co.uk wrote:
On Fri 17 Oct 2014 at 03:20:44 +0200, lee wrote:
Brian a...@cityscape.co.uk writes:
Not that I'm suggesting setting up exim to offer an invalid HELO;
it will lead to trouble
Brian a...@cityscape.co.uk writes:
An address literal is not the same as an IP address. An MTA should not
be rejecting mail on the basis that the HELO is an address literal.
Oh, then what is it?
Using an example from RFC5321, an address literal is [123.255.37.2]. An
IP address would
[I may be misunderstanding how your mail system works but your Date:
header doesn't look right]
On Sun 19 Oct 2014 at 00:53:44 +0200, lee wrote:
Brian a...@cityscape.co.uk writes:
On Fri 17 Oct 2014 at 03:15:49 +0200, lee wrote:
There is no mentioning of /etc/mailname here. Perhaps
On Sun 19 Oct 2014 at 01:19:51 +0200, lee wrote:
Brian a...@cityscape.co.uk writes:
An address literal is not the same as an IP address. An MTA should not
be rejecting mail on the basis that the HELO is an address literal.
Oh, then what is it?
Using an example from RFC5321, an
On Sat, 18 Oct 2014 00:13:54 +0100
Brian a...@cityscape.co.uk wrote:
On Fri 17 Oct 2014 at 03:20:44 +0200, lee wrote:
Brian a...@cityscape.co.uk writes:
Not that I'm suggesting setting up exim to offer an invalid HELO;
it will lead to trouble sooner or later. However, as a reason
Brian a...@cityscape.co.uk writes:
Not that I'm suggesting setting up exim to offer an invalid HELO; it
will lead to trouble sooner or later. However, as a reason for mail
being rejected or not arriving it doesn't come top of the list.
Not accepting invalid HELOs is pretty high on the list
Brian a...@cityscape.co.uk writes:
On Mon 13 Oct 2014 at 04:12:04 +0200, lee wrote:
Jonathan Dowland j...@debian.org writes:
On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 02:45:44PM -0400, Harry Putnam wrote:
And if so, is that not acquired from /etc/hosts?
snip
Egad ... I just noticed that was from a
Brian a...@cityscape.co.uk writes:
On Mon 13 Oct 2014 at 04:06:27 +0200, lee wrote:
Harry Putnam rea...@newsguy.com writes:
lee l...@yagibdah.de writes:
[...]
Thanks for the tips.
SMTP EHLO 2xd
That's an invalid helo string.
Is a valid one made up of just the full
On Fri 17 Oct 2014 at 03:15:49 +0200, lee wrote:
Brian a...@cityscape.co.uk writes:
On Mon 13 Oct 2014 at 04:12:04 +0200, lee wrote:
Jonathan Dowland j...@debian.org writes:
On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 02:45:44PM -0400, Harry Putnam wrote:
And if so, is that not acquired from
On Fri 17 Oct 2014 at 03:18:14 +0200, lee wrote:
Brian a...@cityscape.co.uk writes:
On Mon 13 Oct 2014 at 04:06:27 +0200, lee wrote:
Harry Putnam rea...@newsguy.com writes:
lee l...@yagibdah.de writes:
[...]
Thanks for the tips.
SMTP EHLO 2xd
That's an
On Fri 17 Oct 2014 at 03:20:44 +0200, lee wrote:
Brian a...@cityscape.co.uk writes:
Not that I'm suggesting setting up exim to offer an invalid HELO; it
will lead to trouble sooner or later. However, as a reason for mail
being rejected or not arriving it doesn't come top of the list.
On Sun 12 Oct 2014 at 15:42:49 -0400, Harry Putnam wrote:
Jonathan Dowland j...@debian.org writes:
On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 02:45:44PM -0400, Harry Putnam wrote:
And if so, is that not acquired from /etc/hosts?
snip
Egad ... I just noticed that was from a different machine... but the
On Mon 13 Oct 2014 at 04:06:27 +0200, lee wrote:
Harry Putnam rea...@newsguy.com writes:
lee l...@yagibdah.de writes:
[...]
Thanks for the tips.
SMTP EHLO 2xd
That's an invalid helo string.
Is a valid one made up of just the full fqdn?
See
On Mon 13 Oct 2014 at 04:12:04 +0200, lee wrote:
Jonathan Dowland j...@debian.org writes:
On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 02:45:44PM -0400, Harry Putnam wrote:
And if so, is that not acquired from /etc/hosts?
snip
Egad ... I just noticed that was from a different machine... but the
format
On Mon, 13 Oct 2014 10:25:37 +0100
Brian a...@cityscape.co.uk wrote:
On Mon 13 Oct 2014 at 04:06:27 +0200, lee wrote:
Harry Putnam rea...@newsguy.com writes:
lee l...@yagibdah.de writes:
[...]
Thanks for the tips.
SMTP EHLO 2xd
That's an invalid helo string.
On Mon, 13 Oct 2014 10:26:02 +0100
Brian a...@cityscape.co.uk wrote:
On Mon 13 Oct 2014 at 04:12:04 +0200, lee wrote:
Jonathan Dowland j...@debian.org writes:
On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 02:45:44PM -0400, Harry Putnam wrote:
And if so, is that not acquired from /etc/hosts?
snip
On 10/13/2014 5:25 AM, Brian wrote:
On Mon 13 Oct 2014 at 04:06:27 +0200, lee wrote:
Harry Putnam rea...@newsguy.com writes:
lee l...@yagibdah.de writes:
[...]
Thanks for the tips.
SMTP EHLO 2xd
That's an invalid helo string.
Is a valid one made up of just the full fqdn?
See
On Mon 13 Oct 2014 at 10:51:51 +0100, Joe wrote:
On Mon, 13 Oct 2014 10:25:37 +0100
Brian a...@cityscape.co.uk wrote:
On Mon 13 Oct 2014 at 04:06:27 +0200, lee wrote:
Harry Putnam rea...@newsguy.com writes:
lee l...@yagibdah.de writes:
[...]
Thanks for the
On Mon 13 Oct 2014 at 08:31:38 -0400, Jerry Stuckle wrote:
On 10/13/2014 5:25 AM, Brian wrote:
On Mon 13 Oct 2014 at 04:06:27 +0200, lee wrote:
Harry Putnam rea...@newsguy.com writes:
lee l...@yagibdah.de writes:
[...]
Thanks for the tips.
SMTP EHLO 2xd
That's an
Harry Putnam rea...@newsguy.com writes:
Can any of you experienced exim4 hands interpret this output?
Reading RFC-821 would tell you more.
Did the Authentication work or fail?
[NOTE: Just for the information, my lan is a fake one 2xd.{local.lan} was
just invented right
out of thin air
On 12/10/14 14:52, lee wrote:
Harry Putnam rea...@newsguy.com writes:
Can any of you experienced exim4 hands interpret this output?
Reading RFC-821 would tell you more.
Reading RFC 2821 would be even better, since RFC 821 is obsoleted by RFC
2821.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to
lee l...@yagibdah.de writes:
[...]
Thanks for the tips.
SMTP EHLO 2xd
That's an invalid helo string.
Is a valid one made up of just the full fqdn?
And if so, is that not acquired from /etc/hosts?
/etc/hosts
127.0.0.1dv.local.lan dvlocalhost
10.0.0.9
lee l...@yagibdah.de writes:
I accidentally let my prior response get away before I remembered to
ask these questions.
[...]
LOG: MAIN
= ha...@2xd.local.lan U=harry P=local S=569
$ delivering 1Xauru-0003TT-Fh
R: smarthost for rea...@newsguy.com
T: remote_smtp_smarthost for
Martin Read zen75...@zen.co.uk writes:
On 12/10/14 14:52, lee wrote:
Harry Putnam rea...@newsguy.com writes:
Can any of you experienced exim4 hands interpret this output?
Reading RFC-821 would tell you more.
Reading RFC 2821 would be even better, since RFC 821 is obsoleted by
RFC 2821.
Harry Putnam rea...@newsguy.com writes:
lee l...@yagibdah.de writes:
[...]
Thanks for the tips.
SMTP EHLO 2xd
That's an invalid helo string.
Is a valid one made up of just the full fqdn?
And if so, is that not acquired from /etc/hosts?
/etc/hosts
127.0.0.1dv.local.lan
On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 02:45:44PM -0400, Harry Putnam wrote:
And if so, is that not acquired from /etc/hosts?
snip
Egad ... I just noticed that was from a different machine... but the
format is the same on all of mine. So still should stand as something
to critique/
Debian's exim4 will
On Sun, 05 Oct 2014 19:18:33 -0400
Harry Putnam rea...@newsguy.com wrote:
Sorry, I missed this thread originally.
(I'm not sure if this output means it worked or it failed. I can tell
you that nothing is showing up at the other end)
Can any of you experienced exim4 hands interpret this
Joe j...@jretrading.com writes:
[...]
(I'm not sure if this output means it worked or it failed. I can tell
you that nothing is showing up at the other end)
Can any of you experienced exim4 hands interpret this output?
Did the Authentication work or fail?
The message was transmitted and
On Sun 12 Oct 2014 at 19:56:08 +0100, Jonathan Dowland wrote:
On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 02:45:44PM -0400, Harry Putnam wrote:
And if so, is that not acquired from /etc/hosts?
snip
Egad ... I just noticed that was from a different machine... but the
format is the same on all of mine. So
On Sun 12 Oct 2014 at 14:45:44 -0400, Harry Putnam wrote:
Harry Putnam rea...@newsguy.com writes:
lee l...@yagibdah.de writes:
[...]
Thanks for the tips.
SMTP EHLO 2xd
That's an invalid helo string.
Is a valid one made up of just the full fqdn?
And if so, is that
Jonathan Dowland j...@debian.org writes:
On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 02:45:44PM -0400, Harry Putnam wrote:
And if so, is that not acquired from /etc/hosts?
snip
Egad ... I just noticed that was from a different machine... but the
format is the same on all of mine. So still should stand as
Harry Putnam rea...@newsguy.com writes:
Martin Read zen75...@zen.co.uk writes:
On 12/10/14 14:52, lee wrote:
Harry Putnam rea...@newsguy.com writes:
Can any of you experienced exim4 hands interpret this output?
Reading RFC-821 would tell you more.
Reading RFC 2821 would be even better,
Harry Putnam rea...@newsguy.com writes:
lee l...@yagibdah.de writes:
[...]
Thanks for the tips.
SMTP EHLO 2xd
That's an invalid helo string.
Is a valid one made up of just the full fqdn?
See https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2821#section-4.1.1.1
It says to either use the fqdn or, if
Setup: jessie 64 bit
Freshly configured exim4
I'm quite new to exim4 although I've had it running on another Debian
install for few months now. At any rate I'm not experienced enough to
know how to find the source of a problem once I've gotten to the point
where I'm attempting to send mail.
41 matches
Mail list logo
