tags #388460 confirmed pending
thanks
On Sun, Sep 24, 2006 at 02:10:16PM +0200, Andreas Metzler wrote:
> I think that it is ok that sender and recipient address verification
> does not work for smarthost setups by default.
>
> The fact that it took years for somebody to actually discover that
> ad
On 2006-09-21 Marc Haber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[...]
> We'll need to think about a way to support sender verification on a
> system that uses a smarthost. Andreas' suggestion is a possible
> solution, but we'll need to bring our minimaldns configuration option
> in the game: We might be using
On 21/09/06, Marc Haber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Thu, Sep 21, 2006 at 01:11:17PM +0200, Marc Haber wrote:
> And that's the same address you want to fail verification?
No, it is not. After you answered my question in private e-mail (on
purpose?), I now understand the issue. Finally. Sorry fo
On Wed, Sep 20, 2006 at 07:53:39PM +0200, Andreas Metzler wrote:
> 1# using callouts for verification
Only if the smarthost rejects invalid RCPT commands immediately.
Greetings
Marc
--
-
Marc Haber | "I don't tr
On Thu, Sep 21, 2006 at 09:31:09AM +0100, George B. wrote:
> Why on earth does Exim call the smarthost for a local address? :-/
The sender you are trying is not a local address, and everything
nonlocal is passed on to the smarthost.
> >2# setting no_verify on the smarthost router and having a dns
On Thu, Sep 21, 2006 at 01:11:17PM +0200, Marc Haber wrote:
> And that's the same address you want to fail verification?
No, it is not. After you answered my question in private e-mail (on
purpose?), I now understand the issue. Finally. Sorry for being so
slow on the mark.
We'll need to think abo
On Thu, Sep 21, 2006 at 11:41:40AM +0200, Marc Haber wrote:
> I am not sure whether Andreas' Diagnosis is right.
I am sure now that Andreas' is right. I'll need to ponder (and ask
exim-users) how to solve this.
Greetings
Marc
--
--
On 21/09/06, Marc Haber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
And that's the same address you want to fail verification?
No, that is the recipient address. I am trying to verify sender
addresses. Doing the "exim -bt ..." test with any other (non-local,
even if it is a fake, non-existent domain) address r
On Thu, Sep 21, 2006 at 11:23:17AM +0100, George B. wrote:
> On 21/09/06, Marc Haber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >It looks like that your smarthost router is not recognizing the domain
> >as local (... is in "! +local_domains"? yes.)
> >
> >Does it correctly route the address as in
> >exim -bt [EM
On 21/09/06, Marc Haber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
It looks like that your smarthost router is not recognizing the domain
as local (... is in "! +local_domains"? yes.)
Does it correctly route the address as in
exim -bt [EMAIL PROTECTED]
as a local domain?
I did: "exim -bt [EMAIL PROTECTED]" a
On Thu, Sep 21, 2006 at 09:31:09AM +0100, George B. wrote:
> Why on earth does Exim call the smarthost for a local address? :-/
It looks like that your smarthost router is not recognizing the domain
as local (... is in "! +local_domains"? yes.)
Does it correctly route the address as in
exim -bt [
On 20/09/06, Andreas Metzler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The interesting bit is this one:
[...]
> check !verify = sender
>
> Verifying [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[...]
> dsaodpojdopj.com in "! +local_domains"? yes (end of list)
> R: smarthost for [EMAIL PR
On 2006-09-20 "George B." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 20/09/06, Marc Haber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[...]
> >Try exim4 -d -bh and simulate an SMTP session with a
> >invalid sender on the terminal. The debug output will probably help.
> >If not, send the debug output to the bug report.
> I a
On 20/09/06, Marc Haber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Wed, Sep 20, 2006 at 03:26:39PM +0100, George B. wrote:
> I attach the config.autogenerated file for the problem server.
I do not see the attachment.
Yeah I noticed, sorry. I posted a followup, but BTS took some time to accept.
> I have
On Wed, Sep 20, 2006 at 03:26:39PM +0100, George B. wrote:
> I attach the config.autogenerated file for the problem server.
I do not see the attachment.
> I have set the appropriate option in the macros file
Which option, which macros file?
Try exim4 -d -bh and simulate an SMTP session with a
Package: exim4-daemon-light
Version: 4.63-3
Severity: normal
Hello,
For some reason, sender verification does not seem to work on my Etch
Exim4 server. I have 2 Sarge servers with nearly identical
configurations that have sender verification working just fine.
I attach the config.autogenerated f
16 matches
Mail list logo
