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

Re: exim configuration



On Fri, May 17, 2002 at 11:59:49PM -0400, Tom Allison wrote:
[...] 
| All three of you helped explain it to me.
| I got this far (from the base server [option 1]):
| 
| 2002-05-17 23:57:29 178vLV-0001QC-00 <= tallison@tacocat.net 
| U=tallison P=local S=351
| 2002-05-17 23:57:29 178vLV-0001QC-00 ** tallison1@twmi.rr.com 
| R=lookuphost T=remote_smtp: SMTP error from remote mailer
| after MAIL FROM:<tallison@tacocat.net> SIZE=1384: host 
| ohmx02.mgw.rr.com [65.24.0.110]: 553 5.1.8 <tallison@tacocat.net>
| ... Domain of sender address tallison@tacocat.net does not exist

This means that the other server rejected your attempt to send through
it.  Your exim has nothing wrong, but notice the cause of the error :

$ host -t any tacocat.net
tacocat.net name server NS3.MYDYNDNS.ORG.
tacocat.net name server NS4.MYDYNDNS.ORG.
tacocat.net name server NS5.MYDYNDNS.ORG.
tacocat.net name server NS1.MYDYNDNS.ORG.
tacocat.net name server NS2.MYDYNDNS.ORG.

Ok, so your domain has some name servers that are authoritative for
it, but no A record.  That itself is not a problem since a *domain*
doesn't _need_ an A record.  You can have A records for individual
hosts in your domain instead (eg www.tacocat.net, mail.tacocat.net,
etc).

$ host -t mx tacocat.net

This is a problem.  You have no A *and* no MX records for your domain.
RoadRunner's smtp servers are rejecting any mails whose return address
has a domain that can't be contacted.  If their server did accept the
mail, and then had to bounce it for some reason (eg the recipient is
over their quota), they would be stuck with an undeliverable bounce
message.

The solution is to either not try and use that domain as your email
address, or to correct the DNS records for it.

HTH,
-D

-- 

A perverse man stirs up dissension,
and a gossip separates close friends.
        Proverbs 16:28
 
GnuPG key : http://dman.ddts.net/~dman/public_key.gpg

Attachment: pgpKV3mZR9NYd.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: