Re: [Exim] Read errors and Mailman

Top Page
Delete this message
Reply to this message
Author: Tabor J. Wells
Date:  
To: John Jones
CC: exim-users
Subject: Re: [Exim] Read errors and Mailman
On Mon, Jun 10, 2002 at 06:08:53PM -0700,
John Jones <chimera@???> is thought to have said:

> I am having some trouble with some Mailman lists sending mail to a
> particular user. This user happens to be the list owner, and we are
> attempting to figure out WHY this is happening.
>
> Error messages in the mailq on waiting outbound mail:
>
> g5B011p14289      398 Mon Jun 10 17:01
> <umpires-admin@???>
>                  (reply: read error from mail1.aaahawk.com.)
>                                        <RikkiTikki@???>
> g5A015p09560      502 Sun Jun  9 17:01
> <umpires-admin@???>
>                  (Deferred: Connection reset by mail1.aaahawk.com.)
>                                        <RikkiTikki@???>

>
> What exactly does a 'read error' mean? Is this an issue from my server,
> or their server? Is there a possibility that the target server is using
> an RBL that I am somehow listed in? (I had an email scare a few months
> ago, stating that my IP appeared in such a DB because it was an ADSL
> IP).
>
> Any help appreciated. I couldn't find much help on Google or on the
> archives.


I'm not sure why you're posting this to exim-users since the mailq output
you quote above is not from Exim. It looks like a recent version of Sendmail
given the queue ids above.

In any case, it's likely that the problem is mail1.aaahawk.com's firewall
which appears to be a Cisco Pix with their 'MailGuard' enabled. This causes
problems with various mail servers that result in problems like the above
(SMTP sessions failing to complete, connection resets, etc). I suspect if
they turn that off ('no fixup protocol smtp') the problems will go away.

Mailguard offers nothing but a false sense of security at the expense of
ESMTP and reliable mail delivery.

Tabor

--
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Tabor J. Wells                                     twells@???
Fsck It!                 Just another victim of the ambient morality