l i n u x - u s e r s - g r o u p - o f - d a v i s
Next Meeting:
July 7: Social gathering
Next Installfest:
Latest News:
Jun. 14: June LUGOD meeting cancelled
Page last updated:
2005 Jun 29 09:30

The following is an archive of a post made to our 'vox mailing list' by one of its subscribers.

Report this post as spam:

(Enter your email address)
[fwd] Re: [vox] Re: Earthlink "test" messages to 'postmaster'
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[fwd] Re: [vox] Re: Earthlink "test" messages to 'postmaster'

----- Forwarded message from "Karsten M. Self" <kmself@ix.netcom.com> -----

Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2005 22:21:16 -0700
From: "Karsten M. Self" <kmself@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: Re: [vox] Re: Earthlink "test" messages to 'postmaster'
To: Bill Kendrick <nbs@sonic.net>, Rod Roark <rod@sunsetsystems.com>

on Tue, Jun 28, 2005 at 05:16:16PM -0700, Bill Kendrick (nbs@sonic.net) wrote:
> Ah - Got a response :)
>   "Sorry about that, We had some issues with mails not getting to your
>   domain because of no MX record.  Please ignore them."

I think I'm the cause of this.

On or about the 19th, Earthlink modified its outbound email server in a
way that makes it impossible to send to a host that doesn't have an MX.
Instead I get a bounce message from ELNK's smarthost of the form:

    This message was created automatically by mail delivery software.

    A message that you sent could not be delivered to one or more of its
    recipients. This is a permanent error. The following address(es) failed:

        host lookup did not complete: retry timeout exceeded

This is in violation of recommendations and standard practices, if not
RFCs.  SOP is to fall back to 'A' records where an MX doesn't exist.

The Cricket Book (Paul Albitz & Cricket Liu, _DNS and BIND, Third
Edition_, O'Reilly &Associates, (c) 1998, ISBN 1-56592-512-2), on pp
94-95 suggests that hosts which are intended to receive mail have an MX,
as the sending MTA will query same anyway.  No, it's not required, but
it is good practice.  Note that this means setting up a separate MX for
*each* likely inbound mail host.  Note too that this is entirely
different from SPF (several people have been confused on the issue).

I've requested ELNK look into the matter and it's actually somewhat
reassuring to see that they are actually doing this.

I'd submitted this to (IIRC) root or postmaster@svlug.org, I think Bill
got that mail and said he'd forward it to Rob.

Anyhow:  I've been unable to send mail to LUGoD lists for the past week.
Per my previous request apparently to Bill:  could we get an MX set up
so we're at least kosher, as it seems ELNK are taking their sweet time
with this?

...and you're welcome to copy/forward this to the list as I clearly
can't do so myself.


Karsten M. Self <kmself@ix.netcom.com>        http://kmself.home.netcom.com/
 What Part of "Gestalt" don't you understand?
    You want my advice?
    Oh, yes, please.
    Go back to Bulgaria.
    - Casablanca

----- End forwarded message -----

-bill!                          Picn*x14 --- Linux Anniversary Picnic & BBQ!
bill@newbreedsoftware.com       Sunnyvale Baylands Park, Sunday, August 14th
http://newbreedsoftware.com/    http://linuxpicnic.org/ to RSVP & volunteer!
vox mailing list

LUGOD Group on LinkedIn
Sign up for LUGOD event announcements
Your email address:
LUGOD Group on Facebook
'Like' LUGOD on Facebook:

Hosting provided by:
Sunset Systems
Sunset Systems offers preconfigured Linux systems, remote system administration and custom software development.

LUGOD: Linux Users' Group of Davis
PO Box 2082, Davis, CA 95617
Contact Us

LUGOD is a 501(c)7 non-profit organization
based in Davis, California
and serving the Sacramento area.
"Linux" is a trademark of Linus Torvalds.

Sponsored in part by:
EDGE Tech Corp.
For donating some give-aways for our meetings.