From nobody Sat May 20 04:45:34 2023 X-Original-To: questions@mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4QNWP45V5jz4BYfC for ; Sat, 20 May 2023 04:45:44 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from vagabond@blackfoot.net) Received: from mx1.blackfoot.net (mx1.blackfoot.net [216.14.232.10]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "mx1.blackfoot.net", Issuer "RapidSSL Global TLS RSA4096 SHA256 2022 CA1" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4QNWP40NC3z3CMy for ; Sat, 20 May 2023 04:45:43 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from vagabond@blackfoot.net) Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; none Received: from bmfe1.blackfoot.net ([66.109.128.161]) by mx1.blackfoot.net ({9cf3d135-7b6e-4041-a57b-61a932741f4e}) via TCP (outbound) with ESMTP id 20230520044535686_0000; Fri, 19 May 2023 22:45:35 -0600 X-RC-FROM: Received: from webmail.blackfoot.net (unknown [192.168.100.133]) by bmfe1.blackfoot.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id B800040CEE; Fri, 19 May 2023 22:45:33 -0600 (MDT) List-Id: User questions List-Archive: https://lists.freebsd.org/archives/freebsd-questions List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Fri, 19 May 2023 21:45:34 -0700 From: vagabond To: "Dan Mahoney (Ports)" Cc: Dewayne , questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: sendmail error, "MX list for mydomain.com points back to server.mydomain.com" In-Reply-To: References: <303e35e4d89e68dcd9863239dcda568e@blackfoot.net> <30b97aa95162c163c1781ba1a0fa8e25@blackfoot.net> <15AF7ED7-BBD9-428D-939F-4AA5B349C578@gushi.org> <66db9ba3bd66fcc56affdbf7a2621021@blackfoot.net> <2f8bca59462afe206043bea73241bbf2@blackfoot.net> <3da26eb675ecd5d10947fb53fcf3524a@blackfoot.net> <6068541D-A81B-45F0-B961-FD5CD6969FA0@gushi.org> User-Agent: Roundcube Webmail/1.4.11 Message-ID: X-Sender: vagabond@blackfoot.net Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-MAG-OUTBOUND: blackfoot.redcondor.net@66.109.128.161/32 DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha256; b=AcFfj6ZguLieG724gAl/heDKt79AfzUv8eFUZYxglGGXe+/F8qp5mi/Q2iFhu7TYS0/TYh3y0WnhcDgVTMBU9K2kwRMO5IOwdzZC1OnRSZsQgLJey7ZbSpZImjFj6JO5XvpAY1iirmplFi6uCokvtlrsX7Lg/6+yKc+/TZMt3j1ZJOZxOoQA84p8dD/yOShT9JmmhTxbI4SmLw6SAm8KfTABjAxQQ8Y3g1hM5u5lh8sjtHfRhySAgF2mD/7TcJ/ortLsJ5OF82QWXW4xvoHqI6tk6mhZyHT4OxZctHd8WwmF7jRp9UcFZwryVbjT61wMhvLXigwzNNnZE7myMPSJJg==; s=ew; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=blackfoot.net; v=1; bh=qLZNaOwQ2U7KPk5V9/aND0x3y5zv1tE+6tipbN8O8XQ=; h=from:to:message-id; X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4QNWP40NC3z3CMy X-Spamd-Bar: ---- X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-4.00 / 15.00]; REPLY(-4.00)[]; ASN(0.00)[asn:21947, ipnet:216.14.224.0/19, country:US] X-Rspamd-Pre-Result: action=no action; module=replies; Message is reply to one we originated X-ThisMailContainsUnwantedMimeParts: N On 2023-05-19 16:41, Dan Mahoney (Ports) wrote: > Any luck? Unfortunately, no I was going to send the below last night but wanted to try some more things. I did, but haven't gotten much useful info. On 2023-05-18 16:11, little.analyst892@aceecat.org wrote: > On Thu, May 18, 2023 at 03:36:52PM -0700, vagabond wrote: >> ;; res_nquerydomain(ns.dreamchaser.org, dreamchaser.org, 1, 28) >> ;; res_query(ns.dreamchaser.org.dreamchaser.org, 1, 28) >> ;; res_nmkquery(QUERY, ns.dreamchaser.org.dreamchaser.org, IN, AAAA) >> ;; res_send() >> ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 45481 >> ;; flags: rd; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 0, AUTHORITY: 0, ADDITIONAL: 0 >> ;; ns.dreamchaser.org.dreamchaser.org, type = AAAA, class = IN >> ;; Querying server (# 1) address = 127.0.0.1 >> ;; new DG socket >> ;; got answer: >> ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NXDOMAIN, id: 45481 > Not a complete answer, but all these commands look up the IPv4 address > (ie. the A record), while the debug output is for the IPv6 (AAAA). I think that output was too limited; it does issue an AAAA request, and that's the above output. I may not have had the appropriate debug codes turned on to see the request; there's a bazillion of them and not well documented. It dawned on me this morning that sendmail shouldn't be doing any IPv6 stuff at all, as I have commented out the line: dnl DAEMON_OPTIONS(`Name=IPv6, Family=inet6, Modifiers=O') However, if I run sendmail like this: sendmail -d0.8 -d8.99 -v -L sm-dbg -bD I see it drilling down to find all the local addresses, including ipv6 addresses. If you omit the -d8.99 the output I see is: Canonical name: ns.dreamchaser.org UUCP nodename: ns.dreamchaser.org a.k.a.: [66.109.141.57] a.k.a.: ns.dreamchaser.org. a.k.a.: ns a.k.a.: [192.168.151.101] a.k.a.: [IPv6:0:0:0:0:0:0:0:1] a.k.a.: localhost.dreamchaser.org. a.k.a.: [IPv6:fe80:0:0:0:0:0:0:1] a.k.a.: [127.0.0.1] so it feels like ipv6 is not really/fully turned off. I'm kinda at my wits end. I haven't gotten a good handle on the diagnostic code. I tried turning everything on (or thought that's what I was doing) and ran out of memory, which was a surprise. Questions: Is anyone (besides me) still running only ipv4, and if so, would you be willing to start sendmail as: sendmail -d0.8 -bD (then kill it ^C) and send me the output? Can someone running both ipv4 and ipv6 do the same? I was thinking about trying to turn ipv6 on but I don't have a clue how easy that is to do, and I'm not convinced it would solve the issue. Another path I'm considering is installing postfix and seeing what it thinks, but I'm going to spend a little more time beating on this first. Gary