[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Should I Abandon Mutt and Exim4?



Jacob S wrote:

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Fri, 13 Jan 2006 09:02:33 -0500
"Thomas H. George" <lists@tomgeorge.info> wrote:

My system is Sarge with a 2.6.11 kernel. We have a Verizon DSL connection. I can send and receive email with Mozilla and receive
mail with fetchmail but I have not been able to setup exim4 to send
mail from mutt.

With Mozilla the setup is:

Account Name: lists
Your Name: Thomas H. George
email address: lists@tomgeorge.info
POP mail server
server name: mail.tomgeorge.info port 110
user name: lists@tomgeorge.info
Outgoing Server (SMTP) Settings
server name: outgoing.verzison.net port 25
user name: dryden

With exim4 the setup using dpkg-reconfigure exim4-config is

Split configuration into small files?: No
mail sent by smarthost; received via SMTP or fetchmail
System mail name: tomgeorge.info
IP address to listen to: 127.0.0.1
Other destinations for which mail is accepted: Left Blank
Machines to relay for: Left Blank
Machine handling outgoing mail for this host (smarthost): outgoing.verizion.net
Hide local name in outgoing mail: No
Keep number of DNS-queries minimal: No

In addition I have edited the file /etc/exim4/passwd.client adding a
line

mail.verizion.net:dryden:OurPassword

Somewhere I have gone wrong in the setup but, having tried various combinations without success, I need help. I am attaching the the
result of tail /var/log/exim4/mainlog in hopes this makes my mistake
obvious and someone can put me straight.

Tom George

------------------------------------------------------------------------

2006-01-11 12:20:10 1Ewjdq-0004pA-Oa <= lists@tomgeorge.info U=tom P=local S=436 id=20060111172010.GA18538@tomgeorge.info
2006-01-11 12:20:11 1Ewjdq-0004pA-Oa ** mail@tomgeorge.info
R=smarthost T=remote_smtp_smarthost: SMTP error from remote mailer
after MAIL FROM:<lists@tomgeorge.info> SIZE=1474: host
outgoing.verizon.net [206.46.232.12]: 550 5.7.1 Authentication
Required 2006-01-11 12:20:11 1Ewjdr-0004pD-9G <= <>
R=1Ewjdq-0004pA-Oa U=Debian-exim P=local S=1383
2006-01-11 12:20:11 1Ewjdq-0004pA-Oa Completed
2006-01-11 12:20:11 1Ewjdr-0004pD-9G ** lists@tomgeorge.info
R=smarthost T=remote_smtp_smarthost: SMTP error from remote mailer
after MAIL FROM:<> SIZE=2444: host outgoing.verizon.net
[206.46.232.12]: 550 5.7.1 Authentication Required
2006-01-11 12:20:11 1Ewjdr-0004pD-9G Frozen (delivery error message)

So obviously the server is saying exim4 hasn't authenticated before it
is trying to send the e-mail.

Marc responded, "Does outgoing.verizon.net advertise STARTTLS? If
not, you need to authorize your exim to do authentication over an
unencryped connection.

If I understand the attached quote from /usr/share/doc/exim4/README.Debian.gz exim should handle this automatically (and the Mozilla setup referred to above is set to use
TLS if available). Is there some other setting I should change? - Tom
George

Exim4 can handle it transparently, but it seems by default Debian sets
up exim4 to only use tls authentication.

Try editing /etc/exim4/exim4.conf.template and edit the
'remote_smtp_smarthost:' section. Change "tls_tempfail_tryclear =
false" to "tls_tempfail_tryclear = true". Immediately below that line,
insert a new line reading "hosts_require_auth = outgoing.verizon.net".
(And make sure you spell 'verizon' correctly. I notice you misspelled it
several different ways throughout your e-mail, which can also cause
problems like you describe.) Once you're done editing the file, run
'update-exim4.conf' to generate the new config files.

HTH,
Jacob
Yes, this helped but there is still a catch. Immediately following another attempt to mail from mutt to mail@tomgeorge.info I checked exim4's mainlog and found

2006-01-13 15:30:16 1ExVYu-0006fd-4a <= tom@tomgeorge.info U=tom P=local S=446 id=20060113203016.GB25603@tomgeorge.info
2006-01-13 15:30:16 1ExVYu-0006fd-4a == mail@tomgeorge.info R=smarthost T=remote_smtp_smarthost defer (-53): retry time not reached for any host.

Tom




Reply to: