On Thu, 18 Mar 1999, John-Paul Pagano wrote:
> A followup: directly after I sent my mail, my Intranet postmaster alias received two of the failed messages I had sent, and I copy the text
> below. Hopefully this will make the problem more clear. I see that the exim server is attempting to find the address "jpagano" (my address)
> in the domain "fatcat.inven.com". This seems odd, since our domain is "inven.com" and fatcat is simply the machine on which our external exim
> server resides. But, again, I am receiving mail from every other internal and Internet machine fine. Strange.
That sounds as if this is a qualify_domain problem perhaps?
> ------ This is a copy of the message, including all the headers. ------
>
> Return-path: <web@???>
> Received: from data.rangersoftware.com [204.142.49.138]
> by fatcat.inven.com with esmtp (Exim 1.71 #1)
> id 10NkOc-0001QZ-00; Thu, 18 Mar 1999 16:32:06 -0500
> Received: (from root@localhost)
> by data.rangersoftware.com (8.8.8+Sun/8.8.8) id QAA15406
> for jpagano@???; Thu, 18 Mar 1999 16:23:03 -0500 (EST)
> Date: Thu, 18 Mar 1999 16:23:03 -0500 (EST)
> From: Web Project Administrator <web@???>
> Message-Id: <199903182123.QAA15406@???>
> Content-Type: text
> Bcc:
That message contains no To: header - so Exim has added a blank Bcc: to
make it valid according to RFC 822. Unfortunately Exim 1.71 hasn't
logged a "for" item in the Received: header (I think that got added in a
later release) so we can't tell what the envelope header was at that
stage, though earlier it is logged as jpagano@???.
> Received: by mailnyc with smtp (Exim 2.10)
> id 10NlXR-0000VV-00; Thu, 18 Mar 1999 17:45:17 -0500
> Received: from mailnyc [195.1.2.68]
> by fatcat.inven.com with esmtp (Exim 1.71 #1)
> id 10NlVs-0002AS-00; Thu, 18 Mar 1999 17:43:40 -0500
> Received: by mailnyc with smtp (Exim 2.10)
> id 10NlXP-0000VR-00; Thu, 18 Mar 1999 17:45:15 -0500
> Received: from mailnyc [195.1.2.68]
> by fatcat.inven.com with esmtp (Exim 1.71 #1)
> id 10NlVp-0002AB-00; Thu, 18 Mar 1999 17:43:37 -0500
Those look odd. Have you changed received_header_text on mailnyc? It
isn't logging where the message came from, nor the envelope header
("for"). Cutting out those things make make things more secure, but it
makes diagnosing this kind of problem more difficult. The two hosts are
obviously playing ping-pong with this message. Check the routing for the
two domains on each of them, by running
exim -bt jpagano@???
exim -bt jpagano@???
if necessary with -d9 to see whether it is rewriting anything.
--
Philip Hazel University of Cambridge Computing Service,
ph10@??? Cambridge, England. Phone: +44 1223 334714.
--
*** Exim information can be found at
http://www.exim.org/ ***
