Thanks All,
I fully accept that exim is as it is, and being an
(instrumentation-)developer
myself it's easy to see how we got here. As stated in my very first post,
I did make it all work by using "proper" ;-) entries in /etc/hosts,
hostname and mailname. This being my first email server instal
On 5/19/2013 3:45 AM, Klaus Doering wrote:
> Stan,
>
> Thank you for taking the time to explain your perspective. Maybe it is
> the tone of your teachings that tickle me, maybe it's just that I'm no
> big fan of sweeping statements a la "Don't do it, ever". As I described
Many folks with long ex
On Sun, May 19, 2013 at 6:21 PM, Klaus Doering
wrote:
>
> On 19/05/13 12:48, Arun Khan wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, May 19, 2013 at 2:15 PM, Klaus Doering
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> I agree that in a different setting, where there are many users,
>>> hundreds of emails per minute and other mission-critical stuff
On Du, 19 mai 13, 13:51:01, Klaus Doering wrote:
>
> This email server is not directly connected to the 'net, it sits behind
> a router. Thus, there is one external IP for which I've registered an "A"
> record and an "MX" record on a public DNS server, and then there is an
> internal IP server on
On 19/05/13 12:48, Arun Khan wrote:
On Sun, May 19, 2013 at 2:15 PM, Klaus Doering
wrote:
I agree that in a different setting, where there are many users,
hundreds of emails per minute and other mission-critical stuff is going
on, one needs to design the infrastructure a lot more carefully.
On Sun, May 19, 2013 at 2:15 PM, Klaus Doering
wrote:
>
> I agree that in a different setting, where there are many users,
> hundreds of emails per minute and other mission-critical stuff is going
> on, one needs to design the infrastructure a lot more carefully.
>
As a thumb rule, any system pro
Stan,
Thank you for taking the time to explain your perspective. Maybe it is
the tone of your teachings that tickle me, maybe it's just that I'm no
big fan of sweeping statements a la "Don't do it, ever". As I described
in my initial post, this thread concerns a small domestic setting. There
is
On 5/16/2013 2:17 PM, Klaus Doering wrote:
> Stan, Thank you for the teaching. Indeed, there are many books I should
> have read already, alas, there are a great many subjects about which
> important books are written. So, I go along and learn when things don't
> work as expected. Like now.
>
> Th
Joe,
Yes, I've set the "A" and the "MX" record to the same FQDN, and that is
also the HELO string. (at least now that I adjusted the entry in the
hosts file.)
Thanks,
Klaus
On 16/05/13 19:06, Joe wrote:
Apart from any other issue, please note that the HELO string provided
by your mailserver re
Stan, Thank you for the teaching. Indeed, there are many books I should
have read already, alas, there are a great many subjects about which
important books are written. So, I go along and learn when things don't
work as expected. Like now.
The story about using DHCP to assign fixed addresses doe
On Thu, 16 May 2013 09:02:57 +0100
Klaus Doering wrote:
>
> The RaspPi (running Raspbian, a version of Wheezy for the ARMHF
> architecture) also acts as a mail server, talking
> SMTP to the wider world using exim4. After I got an error message
> from some strict server telling me
>
> 504 5.
On 5/16/2013 3:02 AM, Klaus Doering wrote:
...
> Sorry long post. Can anybody shine light on this, and maybe even know
> how to make use of the DHCP provided
> domain name in exim?
First, using a DHCP server, in a consumer broadband router or otherwise,
to assign -sticky static- addresses and hos
So both addresses are unambiguous. For what reason now would I need a
FQDN? Why wouldn't a domain name suffice?
Typically, I see it that a domain refers to an entity, whereas a FQDN refers to
a host or service within that entity. For your purposes the following sdhould
be sufficient:
Chris Davies a écrit :
> Stefan Schmidt wrote:
>> in my understanding the /etc/hosts file should contain an entry with the
>> FQDN of the host.
>
>> 123.123.123.123 hostname.domain.tld hostname
>
> Yes, that's right.
>
>
>> I would for simplicity prefer to use a domain name instead of a FQDN.
On Sun, Jan 4, 2009 at 9:11 PM, Stefan Schmidt wrote:
> Hello,
>
> in my understanding the /etc/hosts file should contain an entry with the
> FQDN of the host.
>
> 123.123.123.123 hostname.domain.tld hostname
>
> I would for simplicity prefer to use a domain name instead of a FQDN.
>
> 123.123.123
Stefan Schmidt wrote:
> in my understanding the /etc/hosts file should contain an entry with the
> FQDN of the host.
> 123.123.123.123 hostname.domain.tld hostname
Yes, that's right.
> I would for simplicity prefer to use a domain name instead of a FQDN.
> 123.123.123.123 domain.tld hostname
Thanks for your feedback!
So both addresses are unambiguous. For what reason now would I need a
FQDN? Why wouldn't a domain name suffice?
What happens when you want/need to add another machine ?
I use the domain solely for private purposes and I will probably never
need more than two or thre
On Sun, 4 Jan 2009, Stefan Schmidt wrote:
Hello,
Howdy
in my understanding the /etc/hosts file should contain an entry with the FQDN
of the host.
123.123.123.123 hostname.domain.tld hostname
Yes, that is the proper format and order
I would for simplicity prefer to use a domain name ins
Andrew Critchlow wrote:
> Hi, I have not yet adjusted /etc/hosts ? Do I need to do this? What is
> its purpose and why cant it bypass this to use resolv.conf?
You need to edit the /etc/hosts file to set the name and domain
for 127.0.0.1. You can not get these from a DNS server and this
is the inf
Andrew Critchlow wrote:
Hi, I have not yet adjusted /etc/hosts ? Do I need to do this? What is
its purpose and why cant it bypass this to use resolv.conf?
I have tried restarting etc
many thanks
Andrew,
I've not followed the discussion up to this point. I apologize if this
does
Hi, I have not yet adjusted /etc/hosts ? Do I need to do this? What is its purpose and why cant it bypass this to use resolv.conf?
I have tried restarting etc
many thanks
Andrew Critchlow wrote:
> I am trying to set the FQDN domain of my debian box, I have read that
> to set the dns name in resolv.conf use:
...
> It still shows up as: localdomain
Have you also adjusted /etc/hostname and/or /etc/hosts?
Have you tried restarting networking and/or rebooting?
HTH,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi all,
After I finished configuring apache2, I run /etc/init.d/apache2 restart and I
got the following:
"Forcing reload of webserver: Apache2 apache2: could not determine the
server's fully qualified domain name, using 127.0.0.1 for ServerName"
I have my webserver's ip
Lo, on Thursday, April 4, Alan Poulton did write:
> I'm slowly isolating my problems with sendmail and variants. It seems
> they're asking me for my Fully Qualified Domain Name.
>
> I've given the name of my box: hotstuff
>
> My ISP is telus.net, but they give me: bc.hsia.telus.net .. so I know
On Fri, 2002-04-05 at 08:09, Alan Poulton wrote:
> I'm slowly isolating my problems with sendmail and variants. It seems
> they're asking me for my Fully Qualified Domain Name.
>
> I've given the name of my box: hotstuff
>
> My ISP is telus.net, but they give me: bc.hsia.telus.net .. so I know my
On Fri, Mar 01, 2002 at 12:20:50PM +0100, Robert Waldner wrote:
|
| Hi!
|
| I have a problem with the way gethostname() and getdomainname (don't)
| work on Debian.
|
| gethostname() returns the hostname, not qualified.
It (or a similarly named function, I don't remember exactly) returns
the
* Gary Turner ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [020225 18:25]:
> For whatever reason, I just can't wrap my mind around this for my setup.
>
> What I have is:
>
> Netgear gateway/router/firewall which also handles chat with ISP to
> maintain connection negotiate dynamic IP (bessie)
>
> Workstations are etta,
Phil Brutsche writes:
> Samba won't necessarily work if you don't have the hostname pointing to
> the IP in /etc/hosts.
Are you saying that samba will may not work if you have both lines, like
this?
127.0.0.1 hasler.dhh hasler localhost
192.168.1.1 hasler.dhh h
On Fri, 31 Dec 1999, Salman Ahmed wrote:
ssahme >Could this be a case of the DHCP server treating Windows clients
ssahme >differently than non-Windows clients ? Majority of the DHCP clients at
ssahme >our place are Windoze boxes.
yes, if they are pointed at different DNS then anything is possible
A long time ago, in a galaxy far, far way, someone said...
> Salman Ahmed writes:
> > What should I add to this file so I can ping from the machine itself by
> > giving its fqdn hostname ?
>
> 127.0.0.1 matrix. matrix localhost.
>
> With this line any process on the machine can reach the machine
Salman Ahmed writes:
> But the second line in /etc/hosts will have to be updated/modified
> whenever the DHCP lease for that IP address runs out.
If you have a proper localhost line in /etc/hosts you don't actually need
the IP of your interface in there at all.
--
John Hasler
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (J
Salman Ahmed writes:
> What should I add to this file so I can ping from the machine itself by
> giving its fqdn hostname ?
127.0.0.1 matrix. matrix localhost.
With this line any process on the machine can reach the machine itself via
the fqdn, the hostname, or just 'localhost'.
Phil Brutsche wr
On Thu, 30 Dec 1999, Salman Ahmed wrote:
ssahme >
ssahme >Whenever I try to ping this machine (from itself) by giving the
ssahme >fqdn hostname, I get an error message like:
ssahme >
ssahme > unknown host matrix.domain.com
ssahme >
ssahme >nslookup on that fqdn hostname gives an error message sayi
<<< No Message Collected >>>
A long time ago, in a galaxy far, far way, someone said...
[...]
> Some more questions: I seem to be getting the same IP address through
> DHCP.
That's the way it works - each time you reboot you get the same IP until
the lease time runs out.
> After the DNS config update, I can ping this machin
On Thu, 30 Dec 1999, Salman Ahmed wrote:
ssahme >I got one of the network admins to update their DNS config so that the
ssahme >hostname of the machine is mapped to the machine's ethernet address.
ok
ssahme >Some more questions: I seem to be getting the same IP address through
ssahme >DHCP. Afte
On Wed, 29 Dec 1999, Salman Ahmed wrote:
ssahme >how this work ? Will this approach require the network sysadmins to
ssahme >change their (internal) DNS configuration ? Our network admins know of
ssahme >only one OS: Windoze, and generally don't know d*** about
ssahme >Unix/Linux/*BSD, so I am a l
you could add a domain to a DNS in your local network so that works, or
what is probably easier is look for the lmhosts file on the windows box
(use find) it may be called lmhosts.sam or some shit, add the ip and the
names there, it seems to be window's version of /etc/hosts. you may have
to renam
38 matches
Mail list logo
