A couple of annoying F8t3 things

[John Summerfield]

Rodd Clarkson wrote:

>>
> 
> [rodd at localhost ~]$ time host home.gateway
> home.gateway has address 192.168.1.254
> ;; Warning: short (< header size) message received
> ;; connection timed out; no servers could be reached
> ;; Warning: short (< header size) message received
> ;; connection timed out; no servers could be reached
> 
> real    0m20.050s
> user    0m0.002s
> sys     0m0.005s
> [rodd at localhost ~]$ time host 192.168.1.254
> 254.1.168.192.in-addr.arpa domain name pointer home.gateway.
> 
> real    0m0.066s
> user    0m0.004s
> sys     0m0.005s
> [rodd at localhost ~]$ time host 192.168.1.100
> ;; Warning: short (< header size) message received
> ;; connection timed out; no servers could be reached
> 
> real    0m10.009s
> user    0m0.004s
> sys     0m0.006s
> [rodd at localhost ~]$ 
>> Those timeouts look to me to be your problem. You can try running 
>> tcpdump on the server. Read the docs, but it's something like this:
> 
> Yeah, it would appear to be.  Sadly 192.168.1.254 is a wireless internet
> router, so I don't have much control there.

Well, you can install bind and cacheing-nameserver, and configure your 
own zones.

It's educational, earns geek points:-)



>>>>>> Do you control the mail server?
>>>>> Yes?
>>>> Can your mail server resolve the IP addresses of your clients?
>>> Nope.
>> That's probably part of the problem. Can you fix that?
> 
> The mail server is in Western Australia (like you ;-] ) so it doesn't
> really need to be able to resolve my local IP stuff does it?

It probably wants to resolve the IP address of its client; mostly in 
these circles folk on a LAN are using NAT and so the IP address it sees 
is your gateway to the net, js.id.au in my case, 125.168.4.115 in yours. 
125.168.4.115 resolves, so that shouldn't be the problem.

Could you run this command while you send some email:

tcpdump -i any -A -s 9999 -ttt port 25  and host 192.168.1.100


That will show you the traffic, in ascii.

What you ware looking for is something like
ehlo 192.168.1.100
and that's wrong, the text after ehlo should be resolvable.

Can you send through Wholesale Communications Group to see whether 
that's better?

Now I really must go.



-- 

Cheers
John

-- spambait
1aaaaaaa at coco.merseine.nu  Z1aaaaaaa at coco.merseine.nu
-- Advice
http://webfoot.com/advice/email.top.php
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/555375

Please do not reply off-list