David Favor wrote:
> Consider one domain davidfavor.com and a messaged delivered
> to the david@??? user by a cronjob using sendmail.
> Thus the message is enqueued into exim.
I doubt it.
Sendmail writes its queue to a different place than Exim does, and in a
different format. OTOH, if you are actually callign the *Exim* binary..
What do you have in /etc/[mail]/mailer.conf ??
>
> I'd like this message to then lookup the MX records for
> davidfavor.com which are net1.coolsurf.com and net2.coolsurf.com
> and simply deliver the message to the first active MX record.
>
> If a message is enqueued for someone@??? then this message
> follows the same logic, lookup MX records and take first active one.
>
By and large what a right-out-of-the box install will do..
> In other words, I only desire exim to handle outgoing mail, never
> incoming mail on port 25.
>
However... there is a good deal more configuration that comes into play than
just a couple of routers.
> I've tried this:
>
> domainlist local_domains = davidfavor.com : coolsurf.com : ...
>
> ... ... ...
>
> begin routers
>
> smart_route:
> driver = manualroute
> domains = +local_domains
> transport = smtp
> route_list = * net2.coolsurf.com net1.coolsurf.com
>
AFAIK 'route_list =' needs those ':' delimiters also.
But I'm not sure what the point of the other entries is if it starts with an '*'.
> dnslookup:
> driver = dnslookup
> self = send
> transport = remote_smtp
This works for me to prevent overlap between local and off-box routes:
dnslookup:
driver = dnslookup
domains = !+local_domains
transport = remote_smtp
ignore_target_hosts = 0.0.0.0 : 127.0.0.0/8
> which results in the new error...
Not sure what ELSE is awry, but the debug is telling you:
- you did not provide an addressee, nor was one found in /etc/aliases
- you sent while actually logged in as 'root', not su'ed to root.
back out, log in as an 'wheel' member, and try:
mail -s test <some.address@<domain>.<tld> <enter>
Test <enter>
. <enter>
The login UID:GID should show in the logs, even if su'ed to root.
We are looking for any change in the error message.
>
> 2009-05-28 10:45:57 cwd=/common/cron 5 args: exim -d -odf -t
> david@???
> 2009-05-28 10:45:57 cwd=/var/spool/exim 9 args: /usr/sbin/exim
> -d=0xfbb95cfd -odi -t -oem -oi -f <> -E1M9jfx-0002Hk-6c
> 2009-05-28 10:45:57 1M9jfx-0002Hl-73 <= <> R=1M9jfx-0002Hk-6c U=exim
> P=local S=683 T="Mail failure - no recipient addresses" from <> for
> root@???
What do you have root: mapped to in /etc/{mail}/aliases?
Do you even HAVE a system-aliases router / transport set that utilizes /etc/aliases?
Methinks a look at your full ~/configure file is needed ...
> 2009-05-28 10:45:57 cwd=/var/spool/exim 5 args: /usr/sbin/exim
> -d=0xfbb95cfd -odi -Mc 1M9jfx-0002Hl-73
> 2009-05-28 10:45:57 1M9jfx-0002Hl-73 Error in smart_route router:
> unknown routing option or transport name "net1.coolsurf.com"
> 2009-05-28 10:45:57 1M9jfx-0002Hl-73 == root@??? R=smart_route
> defer (-1): error in router: unknown routing option or transport name
> "net1.coolsurf.com"
See above.... but I suspect you are are just feeling the first snowflake of a
blizzard...
In the absence of other information, I *suspect* that;
- your cron job is invoking the Exim binary with inappropriate flags
- parts of your configuration 'main' AND router/transport sets are not what they
need to be.
- you are missing acl's to properly control acceptance and delivery of DSN's
You may not want Exim to take in messages - but what do you expect it to do with
bounces?
Bill
>
> W B Hacker wrote:
>> David Favor wrote:
>>> Maybe I require to use something like this...
>> *snip*
>>
>> Lots of data posted.
>>
>> Very little clear *information* as to what you inted to do vs are doing.
>>
>> 'port 25' - referenced several times....
>>
>> Could you provide, for example <an_IP>:25 <an_other_IP>:25 for each of the
>> players when describing what they are intended to do.
>>
>> It would also help to tell us what specific function 'qpsmtpd' is expected to
>> perform for this setup
>>
>> AFAIK, qpsmtpd was written to provide Exim-like functionality for <another> MTA
>> that did not have what Exim already has built in.
>>
>> More often than not, well-coded compiled 'C' will outperform equally well-coded
>> interpreted perl>
>>
>> Bigtime.
>>
>> Unless you are doing something exceptionally pre-verted, you may not be heading
>> for the best solution available to you.
>>
>> Bill
>>
>>
>
>
