Re: [exim] Why would my backup mail host keep sending queued…

トップ ページ
このメッセージを削除
このメッセージに返信
著者: mark david mcCreary
日付:  
To: exim-users
題目: Re: [exim] Why would my backup mail host keep sending queued email to itself ?
On 12/16/11 8:54 PM, Phil Pennock wrote:
> On 2011-12-16 at 10:27 -0600, mark david mcCreary wrote:
>> I could use some hints on where to look in my configuration to solve the
>> following problem.
> Which IPs are local to this box?



Phil

Good question, and a bit confusing on this virtual machine within a
physical machine.

For instance, I have no idea how to find my public IP address that this
server is hosted at from within the machine.
> What does /sbin/ifconfig -a say?
>



dummy0    Link encap:Ethernet  HWaddr ae:41:6b:04:34:33
           BROADCAST NOARP  MTU:1500  Metric:1
           RX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
           TX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
           collisions:0 txqueuelen:0
           RX bytes:0 (0.0 B)  TX bytes:0 (0.0 B)


eql       Link encap:Serial Line IP
           MASTER  MTU:576  Metric:1
           RX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
           TX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
           collisions:0 txqueuelen:5
           RX bytes:0 (0.0 B)  TX bytes:0 (0.0 B)


eth0      Link encap:Ethernet  HWaddr 12:31:3f:04:68:eb
           inet addr:10.168.107.25  Bcast:10.168.107.255  Mask:255.255.254.0
           inet6 addr: fe80::1031:3fff:fe04:68eb/64 Scope:Link
           UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST  MTU:1500  Metric:1
           RX packets:863355 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
           TX packets:699715 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
           collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000
           RX bytes:438767771 (438.7 MB)  TX bytes:137910794 (137.9 MB)


ifb0      Link encap:Ethernet  HWaddr 2a:2e:9a:cc:e3:e3
           BROADCAST NOARP  MTU:1500  Metric:1
           RX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
           TX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
           collisions:0 txqueuelen:32
           RX bytes:0 (0.0 B)  TX bytes:0 (0.0 B)


ifb1      Link encap:Ethernet  HWaddr 02:57:5e:a9:98:57
           BROADCAST NOARP  MTU:1500  Metric:1
           RX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
           TX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
           collisions:0 txqueuelen:32
           RX bytes:0 (0.0 B)  TX bytes:0 (0.0 B)


lo        Link encap:Local Loopback
           inet addr:127.0.0.1  Mask:255.0.0.0
           inet6 addr: ::1/128 Scope:Host
           UP LOOPBACK RUNNING  MTU:16436  Metric:1
           RX packets:722563 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
           TX packets:722563 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
           collisions:0 txqueuelen:0
           RX bytes:77727615 (77.7 MB)  TX bytes:77727615 (77.7 MB)





> Next, if you run:
>    exim -d+interface -be '${if match_ip{192.0.2.1}{@[]}}'
> then you'll see interface expansion debugging for the @[] list item,
> which is the list of all local interfaces as far as Exim can tell, using
> the normal system ioctls.  In my case, I see "Configured local
> interface:" lines and "Actual local interface address is" lines.

>


I ran that exactly as you typed it above, and the interesting stuff says

Actual local interface address is 127.0.0.1 (lo)
Actual local interface address is 10.168.107.25 (eth0)
Actual local interface address is fe80::1031:3fff:fe04:68eb (eth0)
Actual local interface address is ::1 (lo)
192.0.2.1 in "@[]"? no (end of list)


> Does that help?


Yes, that gives me some more to think about.

In the Exim debug statement, it says this

DNS lookup of canon.mail-list.com (A) succeeded
50.18.117.7 in "0.0.0.0 : 10.0.0.0/8 : 127.0.0.0/8 :172.16.0.0/12 :
192.168.0.0/16"? no (end of list)

The interface command says

Actual local interface address is 10.168.107.25 (eth0)

In the router being used, I do have

   ignore_target_hosts = 0.0.0.0 : 10.0.0.0/8 : 127.0.0.0/8 :\
                         172.16.0.0/12 : 192.168.0.0/16


so if I add the 50.18.117.7 address in there, I think that might stop
the problem.

Is there a more elegant and universal way of accomplishing this, other
than hardcoding an IP address there ?

Thanks a million for your help.

mark