New Received header, WHY?
Hello , I'm getting a new header in my email sent below, why? Received: from localhost (CPE-XX-XX-XX-XXX.wi.rr.com [XX.XX.XXX.XXX]) by smtp.us.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with SMTP id E78FA454D3 for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Thu, 27 Mar 2003 09:03:22 -0500 (EST) I've compared test messages today to those sent weeks ago, and the above email header was NOT present previously, so something has changed. I do use ADR, but the messagingengine.com is there whether I send just through ADR or change ADR to send through ISP. The interesting part is where does http://www.messagingengine.com/ come into play? I never requested any forwarding services. Any ideals? TIA! -- Best regards, Greg Strong TB! v1.63 Beta/7 on Windows XP Service Pack 1 Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: New Received header, WHY?
Dear Greg, On 15:15 27.03.2003, you [Greg Strong] wrote... email header was NOT present previously, so something has changed. I do use ADR, but the messagingengine.com is there whether I send just through ADR or change ADR to send through ISP. May be that your ISP doesn't allow you to connect to remote mail servers anymore. AOL does this for example, among others. Earthlink comes to mind as well ;) Cheers, Johannesmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- You will be a winner today. Pick a fight with a four-year-old. Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: New Received header, WHY?
Hello Johannes, On Thu, 27 Mar 2003, at 16:53:12 GMT +0100 (3/27/2003, 9:53 AM -0500 GMT here), you wrote in mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]: May be that your ISP doesn't allow you to connect to remote mail servers anymore. AOL does this for example, among others. Earthlink comes to mind as well ;) I've already contacted my ISP Road Runner. Telephone support has NO ideal why the messagingengine.com reference exist in my email. I have followed their directions and forwarded it on to Road Runner security. The reference is in the received header no matter if sent directly through my ISP, send through ADR, or through my ISP from ADR. So if RR is not responsible how does it get there? -- Best regards, Greg Strong TB! v1.63 Beta/7 on Windows XP Service Pack 1 Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: New Received header, WHY?
Hello Johannes, On Thu, 27 Mar 2003, at 16:53:12 GMT +0100 (3/27/2003, 9:53 AM -0500 GMT here), you wrote in mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]: May be that your ISP doesn't allow you to connect to remote mail servers anymore. AOL does this for example, among others. Earthlink comes to mind as well ;) The interesting part is the messagingengine.com reference in the Received header is not in the original email of this thread returned by TBUDL. It is only on test message I send from one of my email accounts to another. Why the difference on TBUDL? -- Best regards, Greg Strong TB! v1.63 Beta/7 on Windows XP Service Pack 1 Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: New Received header, WHY?
On Thursday, March 27, 2003, 17:37, Greg Strong wrote: The interesting part is the messagingengine.com reference in the Received header is not in the original email of this thread returned by TBUDL. It is only on test message I send from one of my email accounts to another. Why the difference on TBUDL? Where in the sequence of Recieved: does it occur? Can you post the entire chain here? -- Regards, Marcus Ohlström Using The Bat! v1.62/Beta7 on Windows 2000 5.0 Build 2195 Service Pack 3 PGP Public Key at http://www.canit.se/~marcus/pgp.asc Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: New Received header, WHY?
Hello Marcus, On Thu, 27 Mar 2003, at 18:05:26 GMT +0100 (3/27/2003, 11:05 AM -0500 GMT here), you wrote in mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]: Where in the sequence of Recieved: does it occur? Can you post the entire chain here? Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Received: from server3.fastmail.fm (server3.internal [10.202.2.134]) by www.fastmail.fm (Cyrus v2.1.9) with LMTP; Thu, 27 Mar 2003 09:32:59 -0500 X-Sieve: CMU Sieve 2.2 Received: from smtp.us.messagingengine.com (server3.internal [10.202.2.134]) by server3.fastmail.fm (Cyrus v2.1.9) with LMTP; Thu, 27 Mar 2003 09:32:59 -0500 Received: from smtp.us.messagingengine.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by fastmail.fm (Postfix) with ESMTP id D20D6455AA for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Thu, 27 Mar 2003 09:32:59 -0500 (EST) Received: from 127.0.0.1 ([127.0.0.1] helo=smtp.us.messagingengine.com) by messagingengine.com with SMTP; Thu, 27 Mar 2003 09:32:59 -0500 X-Mail-from: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Delivered-to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Received: from mail5.wi.rr.com (fe5.rdc-kc.rr.com [24.94.163.52]) by smtp.us.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AC4E345629 for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Thu, 27 Mar 2003 09:32:59 -0500 (EST) Received: from GWsMachine ([6x.x6.xx1.xxx]) by mail5.wi.rr.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.757.75); Thu, 27 Mar 2003 08:32:26 -0600 Notice the messagingengine.com reference in the header. I spoke to my ISP's phone support, they did NOT know what it was for. The only thing I changed above were my email addresses, and IP number. So where does http://www.messagingengine.com/ come into play with regard to the headers above? If you could provide some answers, it would be great. -- Best regards, Greg Strong TB! v1.63 Beta/7 on Windows XP Service Pack 1 Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: New Received header, WHY?
On Thursday, March 27, 2003, 18:50, Greg Strong wrote: Where in the sequence of Recieved: does it occur? Can you post the entire chain here? [cut] Could it be fastmail.fm that has changed their configuration? They seem to refer to 127.0.0.1 as smtp.us.messagingengine.com. Maybe they have some dns pointers strangely configured? Hopefully there is someone on this list who can tell more from these logs, I don't know the relevant RFC's to tell exactly what is going on. -- Regards, Marcus Ohlström Using The Bat! v1.62/Beta7 on Windows 2000 5.0 Build 2195 Service Pack 3 PGP Public Key at http://www.canit.se/~marcus/pgp.asc Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: New Received header, WHY?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Thursday, March 27, 2003, Greg Strong wrote... [..] Received: from smtp.us.messagingengine.com (server3.internal [10.202.2.134]) by server3.fastmail.fm (Cyrus v2.1.9) with LMTP; Thu, 27 Mar 2003 09:32:59 -0500 Received: from smtp.us.messagingengine.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by fastmail.fm (Postfix) with ESMTP id D20D6455AA for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Thu, 27 Mar 2003 09:32:59 -0500 (EST) Received: from 127.0.0.1 ([127.0.0.1] helo=smtp.us.messagingengine.com) by messagingengine.com with SMTP; Thu, 27 Mar 2003 09:32:59 -0500 [..] Notice the messagingengine.com reference in the header. I spoke to my ISP's phone support, they did NOT know what it was for. The only thing I changed above were my email addresses, and IP number. So where does http://www.messagingengine.com/ come into play with regard to the headers above? If you could provide some answers, it would be great. They would never know unless they knew what to look for. You'll notice the order of receipt.. it goes: your machine your isp messagingengine.com fastmail.fm I did a quick lookup, and the reason that is happening is fastmail.fm are using messagingengine.com as an MX service. I explain the other day in an email about MX's to somebody. Basically what is happening is that your mail is going through a service that fastmail.fm request it to. ;; ANSWER SECTION: fastmail.fm.3600IN MX 5 smtp.eu.messagingengine.com. fastmail.fm.3600IN MX 0 smtp.us.messagingengine.com. fastmail.fm.3600IN MX 3 smtp.us2.messagingengine.com. This is the answer to my query. What it looks like to me is fastmail.fm have joined forces, or are now owned by messagingengine.com. Performing further lookups on fastmail.fm shows that messagingengine.com also host the domain name servers for fastmail.fm. Hope that relaxes your mind a little... it's not some kind of conspiracy to steel your mail ;) Your ISP is unlikely to know (at least not level 1 support anyway) how to find that kind of information, or do the basic research. If you'd been sent higher, you might have got that info :) - -- Jonathan Angliss ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iQA/AwUBPoM+SyuD6BT4/R9zEQK08ACg1znKZVNMVXBk4ke4z2bA07gFWXEAoNXJ AIZI7nEieKCMwYz182Cj7UGl =SjzZ -END PGP SIGNATURE- Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: New Received header, WHY?
On Thursday, March 27, 2003, 19:09, Jonathan Angliss wrote: I did a quick lookup, and the reason that is happening is fastmail.fm are using messagingengine.com as an MX service. I explain the other day in an email about MX's to somebody. Basically what is happening is that your mail is going through a service that fastmail.fm request it to. You see, I told you someone would have a better knowledge about what to look for in these headers :-) At least I wasn't completely wrong, I just didn't know how to look things up. Not a strangely configured DNS, but I did get the basic idea right. You might not care, but it does satisfy me :-) And to Jonathan, I would greatly appreciate an explanation of MX records if you have the time. If you don't could you point me to some basic but good introduction? -- Regards, Marcus Ohlström Using The Bat! v1.62/Beta7 on Windows 2000 5.0 Build 2195 Service Pack 3 PGP Public Key at http://www.canit.se/~marcus/pgp.asc Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: New Received header, WHY?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Thursday, March 27, 2003, Marcus Ohlström wrote... I did a quick lookup, and the reason that is happening is fastmail.fm are using messagingengine.com as an MX service. I explain the other day in an email about MX's to somebody. Basically what is happening is that your mail is going through a service that fastmail.fm request it to. You see, I told you someone would have a better knowledge about what to look for in these headers :-) hehehe... I do that kind of stuff on a daily basis ;) At least I wasn't completely wrong, I just didn't know how to look things up. Not a strangely configured DNS, but I did get the basic idea right. You might not care, but it does satisfy me :-) You were very close. ;) And to Jonathan, I would greatly appreciate an explanation of MX records if you have the time. If you don't could you point me to some basic but good introduction? Certainly... I'll post it to TBOT as it is away from the topic of TheBat at this point :) - -- Jonathan Angliss ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iQA/AwUBPoNBxiuD6BT4/R9zEQLqMgCfWgSEpvlwdB+rwl6A++aADPEukmoAoJ/I N8w5xKxkoWnXXcHjZl6/3TNS =1dIu -END PGP SIGNATURE- Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: New Received header, WHY?
Hello Jonathan, On Thu, 27 Mar 2003, at 12:09:05 GMT -0600 (3/27/2003, 12:09 PM -0500 GMT here), you wrote in mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]: Hope that relaxes your mind a little... it's not some kind of conspiracy to steel your mail ;) Yes indeed. Your ISP is unlikely to know (at least not level 1 support anyway) how to find that kind of information, or do the basic research. Road Runner support did not know on phone support. If you'd been sent higher, Yes sent email to security. you might have got that info :) They haven't replied yet. Thanks! -- Best regards, Greg Strong TB! v1.63 Beta/7 on Windows XP Service Pack 1 Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
