JP Vossen on 27 Sep 2008 12:02:46 -0700

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

Re: [PLUG] Odd email problem

> Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2008 15:06:53 -0400
> From: gabriel rosenkoetter <>
> At 2008-09-26 10:05 -0400, Toby DiPasquale <> wrote:
>> It sounds like that thing trying to be helpful is postfix itself. What
>> other pieces are there in the chain? (I'm assuming that the mail is
>> going direct to MX from his ISP's outbound MTA).
> Given that is a CNAME for, I'd say
> the administrator of has created as
> a virtual domain rather than adding it to $mynames.

I *am* the administrator of the system...  And you are kind of right, I 
set up Mailman in general and "lists." in particular per:

Here's how:
   sudo vi /etc/mailman/
	DEFAULT_URL_PATTERN = 'http://%s/mailman/'
   sudo postconf -e 'mailman_destination_recipient_limit = 1'
   sudo postconf -e 'relay_domains ='
   sudo postconf -e 'transport_maps = hash:/etc/postfix/transport'
   sudo vi /etc/postfix/transport	mailman:

In other words, /etc/postfix/ has:
	relay_domains =
	transport_maps = hash:/etc/postfix/transport
	mailman_destination_recipient_limit = 1

The string "$mynames" is not present in any file in /etc/postfix.

Did I goof?  (Other than the CNAME issue below, I mean.)

 > Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2008 17:20:26 -0400
 > From: "Jason Stelzer" <>
 > Is there a middle hop in here somewhere? Is something looking up the
 > fqdn and relaying the message after substituting the hostname?
 > I hate to be 'that guy' but 3.6.2 of rfc 1034 seems to suggest that mx
 > records shouldn't be cnames.

Grrrr, it's been a few years since I reviewed any of the SMTP RFCs. 
That's probably it, and the DNS admin is supposed to be changing that 
RSN...  (I'm the server/OS admin, but don't control DNS or other 

 > [...]
 > Now, the reason I asked if there was another hop on the way was
 > because obviously something is looking up the fqdn of the host. If the
 > hostname weren't a cname you wouldn't be seeing the 3 card monty with
 > the hostname.

Yeah, there's the upstream ISP "smart host."

 > That all said, the setup you're describing isn't exactly extra
 > ordinary. It usually works just fine, i wish I could point you at a
 > direct cause.

Right.  The killer is that the setup worked fine for some people (like 
me, duh), and the one person what was consistently t-shooting it with me 
even switched hosting providers (for reasons in addition to this FUBAR), 
and the problem followed him.  So we were pulling our hair out trying to 
find it on his side.  But since I asked this same question on that list, 
2 others have sent me off-list email detailing the same problem.  So it 
was more wide-spread than I was aware.

Thanks to everyone for helping me figure out the mess I made!!!
JP Vossen, CISSP            |:::======|        jp{at}jpsdomain{dot}org
My Account, My Opinions     |=========|
"Microsoft Tax" = the additional hardware & yearly fees for the add-on
software required to protect Windows from its own poorly designed and
implemented self, while the overhead incidentally flattens Moore's Law.
Philadelphia Linux Users Group         --
Announcements -
General Discussion  --