Running exim v1.82 (yes, I know. Upgrade.) on Solaris 2.5.1
For one of our customer domains, txsoft.com, I'm getting rejections. One
sample appears below:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1998-11-05 14:15:08 0zbUs8-0003N7-00 rejected from ns.infotechsys.com
[207.239.53.253]: no valid sender in message headers: return path is
<info@???>
Recipients: info@???
P Received: from ns.infotechsys.com [207.239.53.253]
by siren.shore.net with esmtp (Exim)
id 0zbUs8-0003N7-00; Thu, 5 Nov 1998 14:15:08 -0500
P Received: from [207.239.53.252] by ns.infotechsys.com
(Post.Office MTA v3.5.1 release 219 ID# 120-52124U500L100S0V35)
with SMTP id com for <info@???>;
Thu, 5 Nov 1998 14:12:27 -0500
F From: info@??? <info@???>
T To: info@???
Subject: TXSOFT - Free Subscription Application Form
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1998 14:12:30 -0500
X-Mailer: Allaire Cold Fusion 3.1
I Message-Id: <E0zbUs8-0003N7-00@???>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
However the address verifies.
> exim -bt info@???
jrogers2@???
<-- jrogers2@???
<-- info@???
remote delivery to jrogers2@???
router = localroute, transport = remote_smtp
host shell3.shore.net [207.244.124.103]
An exim -bs session run at -d9 doesn't list any reason why it's rejected
either. Cutting and pasting the above into the data section of an exim -d9
-bs shows that:
[massive snip]
Test
.
Data file written for message 0zbWZu-0004Cc-00
no valid sender in message headers: return path is <info@???>
search_open (0) /usr/local/etc/exim/reject.txt
search_find: file="/usr/local/etc/exim/reject.txt" type=0
key="sender_verify" partial=-1
internal_search_find: file="/usr/local/etc/exim/reject.txt" type=0
key="sender_verify"
file lookup required for sender_verify in /usr/local/etc/exim/reject.txt
550-Sender info@??? verification failed.
550-Sender info@??? verification failed.
LOG: 3 MAIN REJECT
rejected: no valid sender in message headers: return path is <info@???>
550 rejected: no valid sender in message headers: return path is
<info@???>
So what plainly obvious thing am I missing here? I was thinking it might
have been lack of quoting on the body From: but I would have expected that
to yield a malformed header failure, not a sender verification failure.
Any ideas?
TIA,
Tabor
--
________________________________________________________________________
Tabor J. Wells twells@???
Shore.Net Systems Admin. Just another victim of the ambient morality
--
*** Exim information can be found at
http://www.exim.org/ ***
