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

Re: email lacks sender address



On Thu, Apr 28, 2022 at 12:02:50PM -0500, David Wright wrote:
> $ cat /etc/mailname 
> acer.corp1
> $ cat /etc/hosts 
> 127.0.0.1       localhost
> 127.0.1.1       acer1.corp      acer1
> 192.168.1.14    axis.corp       axis
> 
> # The following lines are desirable for IPv6 capable hosts
> ::1     localhost ip6-localhost ip6-loopback
> ff02::1 ip6-allnodes
> ff02::2 ip6-allrouters
> $ hostname
> acer

But you no longer have 'acer' in your /etc/hosts file.  Your hostname
therefore won't have *any* canonical form with dots in it.

> $ domainname
> (none)

That's an NIS command.  It's used by NIS only.  It has nothing to do
with what you appear to think a "domain name" is.

> and here's the email on axis:
> 
> >From auser@acer.corp Thu Apr 28 11:37:06 2022
> Return-path: <auser@acer.corp>
> Envelope-to: auser@axis
> Delivery-date: Thu, 28 Apr 2022 11:37:06 -0500
> Received: from [192.168.1.10] (helo=acer)
>         by axis.corp with esmtp (Exim 4.92)
>         (envelope-from <auser@acer.corp>)
>         id 1nk78c-0001yL-Bm
>         for auser@axis; Thu, 28 Apr 2022 11:37:06 -0500
> Received: from auser by acer with local (Exim 4.94.2)
>         (envelope-from <auser@acer>)
>         id 1nk78b-0000HX-6v
>         for auser@axis; Thu, 28 Apr 2022 11:37:05 -0500

Here, you can see that there was no canonical expansion of "acer" into
a dot-laden name, so your system only identified itself as "acer".  Not
as "acer.corp" or anything similar, in its HELO.

If one of the entries in your /etc/hosts file had contained "acer" as
an alias, then the outcome would have been different.

Interestingly, acer.corp *does* appear in the envelope sender address,
which you can see in the "From " line and the "Return-path:" header.
But in the bottom Received: header, it says "envelope-from <auser@acer>".
I find that quite interesting, but you'd need more knowledge of exim
configuration than I possess to work out what happened there.


Reply to: