Search Results

Search found 5501 results on 221 pages for 'receive'.

Page 39/221 | < Previous Page | 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46  | Next Page >

• ASP.NET sending email through exchange problem

  - by Solmead

  I have an exchange 2010 server running on Windows 2008 R2, I also have a remote webserver running Windows 2003 with multiple sites on it (all asp.net mvc 2 sites). I setup a Transport in exchange and all the websites on my remote web server can send email no problem to anyone in the exchange server and to any external domain. Now for my problem. I am having issues with that webserver, so I moved one of the websites to run on my exchange server, it runs well (low hit website) except that email doesn't work from that site. I tried changing the Transport in exchange to add the IP address of the local machine and the 127.0.0.1 addresses and it still isn't sending any email. Any ideas on how to get this working? The remote websites can still send email no problem, the version of the site that I had to move on the remote server can still email, but on the exchange server for that website email does not send. I would guess it is a Transport issue, since it is running on the same server a firewall shouldn't be the issue. I changed the smtp setting in web.config to localhost, and now I do receive email to my account on the exchange server, but I do not receive any emails on outside addresses. To add more description, this is a custom developed asp.net mvc 2 website. And no errors were being generated in the code when sending the email in either case.

  Read the article

• Mac OS Leopard: SyncServer process constantly using 100% CPU

  - by macca1

  I am running Leopard that I upgraded from Tiger. I've been noticing that every once in a while the SyncServer process starts up and eats up all the CPU. The fans will start going at full blast and the laptop will slow down to a crawl. I need to force quit the process from Activity Monitor to get it under control. It disappears for a while, but eventually gets started again. I do have an iphone as well that I sync so I'm wondering if syncServer might be an apple process checking for my phone plugged in. Edit: Tried iSync and the manual resetsync as suggested, but got this output: Vince-2:~ vince$ /System/Library/Frameworks/SyncServices.framework/Versions/A/Resources/resetsync.pl full 2010-03-12 08:03:50.230 perl[176:10b] SyncServer is unavailable: exception when connecting: connection timeout: did not receive reply PerlObjCBridge: NSException raised while sending reallyResetSyncData to NSObject object name: "ISyncServerUnavailableException" reason: "Can't connect to the sync server: NSPortTimeoutException: connection timeout: did not receive reply ((null))" userInfo: "" location: "/System/Library/Frameworks/SyncServices.framework/Versions/A/Resources/resetsync.pl line 16" ** PerlObjCBridge: dying due to NSException Vince-2:~ vince$ And during that syncServer started spinning up 95-100% just like it always does.

  Read the article

• Help! The log file for database 'tempdb' is full. Back up the transaction log for the database to fr

  - by michael.lukatchik

  We're running SQL Server 2000. In our database, we have an "Orders" table with approximately 750,000 rows. We can perform simple SELECT statements on this table. However, when we want to run a query like SELECT TOP 100 * FROM Orders ORDER BY Date_Ordered DESC, we receive the following message: Error: 9002, Severity: 17, State: 6 The log file for database 'tempdb' is full. Back up the transaction log for the database to free up some log space. We have other tables in our database which are similar in size of the amount of records that are in the tables (i.e. 700,000 records). On these tables, we can run any queries we'd like and we never receive a message about 'tempdb being full'. To resolve this, we've backed up our database, shrunk the actual database and also shrunk the database and files in the tempdb system database, but this hasn't resolved the issue. The size of our log file is set to autogrow. We're not sure where to go next. Are there any ideas why we still might be receiving this message? Error: 9002, Severity: 17, State: 6 The log file for database 'tempdb' is full. Back up the transaction log for the database to free up some log space.

  Read the article

• Exchange 2010 Hub cannot deliver to Exchange 2007 Hub - "451 5.7.3 Cannot achieve Exchange Server authentication"

  - by Graeme Donaldson

  We have an existing Exchange 2007 server in Site A (exch07). I've installed an Exchange 2010 server in Site B (exch10). Both servers have the CAS, Mailbox and Hub roles. Messages sent via SMTP on exch10 which are destined for mailboxes on exch07 are queued with the "Last Error" reported in Queue Viewer as '451 4.4.0 Primary target IP address responded with: "451 5.7.3 Cannot achieve Exchange Server authentication." Attempted failover to alternate host, but that did not succeed. Either there are no alternate hosts, or delivery failed to all alternate hosts.' I've found that some people have resolved this by creating new Receive Connectors which are scoped specifically to apply to connections from the remote hub/s, but I have had no luck doing this. Specifically I created new receive connectors on both servers with the following settings: Remote IP = IP/s of remote server Authentication = "Transport Layer Security (TLS)" and "Exchange Server authentication" Permission Groups = "Exchange servers" and "Legacy Exchange Servers" This made no difference, I see the same error message. What am I missing? Update: We noticed that the Application log had this error message from MSExchangeTransportService: Microsoft Exchange could not find a certificate that contains the domain name exch07.domain.local in the personal store on the local computer. Therefore, it is unable to support the STARTTLS SMTP verb for the connector exch10 with a FQDN parameter of exch07.domain.local. If the connector's FQDN is not specified, the computer's FQDN is used. Verify the connector configuration and the installed certificates to make sure that there is a certificate with a domain name for that FQDN. If this certificate exists, run Enable-ExchangeCertificate -Services SMTP to make sure that the Microsoft Exchange Transport service has access to the certificate key. It turns out that the default self-signed certificate was no longer enabled for the SMTP service for some reason. After enabling the self-signed certificate for SMTP, we no longer get the error in the event logs, but delivery is still failing with the same error message. Update 2: I put a mailbox on exch10 and attempted to deliver a message via SMTP on exch07 and I get the same error.

  Read the article

• HTTP responses curl and wget different results

  - by Fab

  To check HTTP response header for a set of urls I send with curl the following request headers foreach ( $urls as $url ) { // Setup headers - I used the same headers from Firefox version 2.0.0.6 $header[ ] = "Accept: text/xml,application/xml,application/xhtml+xml,"; $header[ ] = "text/html;q=0.9,text/plain;q=0.8,image/png,*/*;q=0.5"; $header[ ] = "Cache-Control: max-age=0"; $header[ ] = "Connection: keep-alive"; $header[ ] = "Keep-Alive: 300"; $header[ ] = "Accept-Charset: ISO-8859-1,utf-8;q=0.7,*;q=0.7"; $header[ ] = "Accept-Language: en-us,en;q=0.5"; $header[ ] = "Pragma: "; // browsers keep this blank. curl_setopt( $ch, CURLOPT_URL, $url ); curl_setopt( $ch, CURLOPT_USERAGENT, 'Googlebot/2.1 (+http://www.google.com/bot.html)'); curl_setopt( $ch, CURLOPT_HTTPHEADER, $header); curl_setopt( $ch, CURLOPT_REFERER, 'http://www.google.com'); curl_setopt( $ch, CURLOPT_HEADER, true ); curl_setopt( $ch, CURLOPT_NOBODY, true ); curl_setopt( $ch, CURLOPT_RETURNTRANSFER, true ); curl_setopt( $ch, CURLOPT_FOLLOWLOCATION, true ); curl_setopt( $ch, CURLOPT_HTTPAUTH, CURLAUTH_ANY ); curl_setopt( $ch, CURLOPT_TIMEOUT, 10 ); //timeout 10 seconds } Sometimes I receive 200 OK which is good other time 301, 302, 307 which I consider good as well, but other times I receive weird status as 406, 500, 504 which should identify an invalid url but when I open it on the browser they are fine for example the script returns http://www.awe.co.uk/ => HTTP/1.1 406 Not Acceptable and wget returns wget http://www.awe.co.uk/ --2011-06-23 15:26:26-- http://www.awe.co.uk/ Resolving www.awe.co.uk... 77.73.123.140 Connecting to www.awe.co.uk|77.73.123.140|:80... connected. HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 200 OK Does anyone know which request header I am missing or adding in excess?

  Read the article

• How to have SSL on Amazon Elastic Load Balancer with a Gunicorn EC2 server?

  - by Riegie Godwin

  I'm a self taught back end engineer so I'm learning all of this stuff as I go along. For the longest time, I've been using basic authentication for my users. Many developers are advising against this approach since each request will contain the username & password in clear text. Anyone with the right skills can sniff on the connection between my iOS application and my Django/Gunicorn Server and obtain their password. I wouldn't want to put my user's credentials at risk so I would like to implement a more secure way of authentication. SSL seems to be the most viable option. My server doesn't serve any static content or anything crazy of that sort. All the server does is send and receive "json" responses from and to my iOS application. Here is my current topology. iOS application ------ Amazon Elastic Load Balancer ------- EC2 Instances running HTTP Gunicorn. Gunicorn runs on port 8000. I have a CNAME record from GoDaddy for the Amazon Elastic Load Balancer DNS. So instead of using the long DNS to make requests, I just use server.example.com. To interact with my servers I send and receive requests to server.example.com:8000/ This setup works and has been solid. However I need to have a more secure way. I would like to setup SSL between my iOS application and my Elastic Load Balancer. How can I go about doing this? Since I am only sending json responses to my application, do I really need to buy a certificate from a CA or can I create my own? (since browsers will not be interacting with my servers. My servers are only designed to send json responses to my iOS application).

  Read the article

• With no password expire notification at logon in Windows 7, how are you configuring password expire

  - by J. L.

  To my understanding, Windows 7 users do not receive password expiration notification during the logon process - it occurs strictly from the system tray. We currently have tray balloon notifications disabled to lessen user distraction, and I expect the password change process is a smoother one during the logon process rather than in an existing session. As a result, users will get prompted to change their passwords at expiration. The users also connect to Terminal Services boxes, but receive the advanced notification for password expiration there. So, Windows 7 is not notifying, but TS/RDS and XP boxes are. Any guidance on configuring this? Personally, I would turn off all expiration notices, but I understand most users would prefer to see the notification. Thoughts? Any GPO or other settings I might be overlooking? The interactive logon setting below is already enabled for our Win7 workstation GPO. My thought is balloon notifications will get turned back on for Windows 7, but I wanted to see if anyone was aware of alternatives. Thanks. Computer Configuration\Windows Settings\Security Settings\Local Policies - Security Options Interactive logon: Prompt user to change password before expiration

  Read the article

• Fixed and dynamic IPs in ISC DHPD lead to double lease

  - by GorillaPatch

  I would like to have a small dynamic adress part and the most clients are assigned a fixed IP adress. My dhcpd.conf looks like this: use-host-decl-names on; authoritative; allow client-updates; ddns-updates on; # Einstellungen fuer DHCP leases default-lease-time 3600; max-lease-time 86400; lease-file-name "/var/lib/dhcpd/dhcpd.leases"; subnet 192.168.11.0 netmask 255.255.255.0 { ddns-updates on; pool { # IP range which will be assigned statically range 192.168.11.1 192.168.11.240; deny all clients; } pool { # small dynamic range range 192.168.11.241 192.168.11.254; # used for temporary devices } } group { host pc1 { hardware ethernet xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx; fixed-address 192.168.11.11; } } The motivation for the pool declaration with deny all hosts comes from the ISC DHCPD homepage http://www.isc.org/files/auth.html This will allow hosts to be first added to the network, where they will receive a temporary IP from the 241-254 adress range and then later write an explicit host declaration. Upon next connect it will receive the right configuration. The problem is that I am getting error messages that 192.168.11.13 has a dynamic and a static lease. I am a bit confused as I expected the pool declaration with deny all clients would not count as dynamic. Dynamic and static leases present for 192.168.11.13. Remove host declaration pc1 or remove 192.168.11.13 from the dynamic address pool for 192.168.11.0/24 Is there a way to have the DHCP server send an DHCPNA to clients if they have a host statement and retain this dynamic range?

  Read the article

• Sporadic email delivery to one user

  - by minamhere

  I have a user that occasionally does not receive emails from outside our organization. It does not seem to matter whether the other person is replying to an initial email or sending a new message. I have checked the Exchange System Manager and there is no record of the sender at all during this time period. No record of the message getting captured by the spam software (GFI Mail Essentials). The sender does not receive an NDR or any other indication that the message didn't arrive. It seems to me that these messages are not even getting to our servers at all. But, this is only impacting one user(that I am aware of) and not all the time. Some messages get through without any problem, others just disappear. The senders are not related at all. One is in another country, one uses AOL, one uses a corporate Exchange server locally. I can't seem to find a pattern. Where else can I look to try to figure out where these messages are going/getting captured? Are there additional logs that I can enable either within GFI or Exchange that might shed some light on this? Thanks. We are using Exchange 2003 on Server 2003. Desktop client is Outlook 2003 on Windows XP Pro.

  Read the article

• Can't connect remotely to Windows Server 2008 R2

  - by JohnyD

  I have a new Dell R710 server running Windows Server 2008 R2. I one of it's 4 nic's set up and the rest are not being used. I have successfully given it an ip address, network mask, and dns servers. I can ping and resolve this machine from anywhere else in the network. However, when I try to connect to it via RDP it does several things: 1) it might just outright refuse me with the message, "This computer can't connect to the remote computer. Try connecting again." 2) it might connect me and let me chose the account I would like to log on as... but when you select an account then you receive the same message as in #1 3) it might actually allow you to connect but only for about 1 minute and then you receive the same message and it closes your session. I have configured the firewall service to allow for RDP over the domain network connection. This didn't have any noticible effect. I have now disabled the firewall for all 3 networks and have even stopped the Windows Firewall service. I am still having the same issue. I am new to Server 2008 R2 and things are very different. Please give me any advice you can on how to resolve this issue and/or any other gotchas that are sure to come my way. The 2003 - 2008 learning curve seems steep. Thanks

  Read the article

• Membership in two domains

  - by imagodei

  Hello! I would your suggestions for an effective solution for a person, who needs to access resources in two Windows domains and wants to use one computer. It's about our CEO, who has accepted a second position in another company. Accessing files and folders isn't big problem. The greatest challenge I see is that he wants to conveniently access Exchange accounts in both companies; he would like to send and receive mail in single Outlook if possible (two profiles?) There is also a challenge with calendars: he would like to have one calendar for all activities from both Exchange accounts. Creating a POP3 account for accessing second Exchange server is a last resort, because obviously there is a problem with scheduling meetings and other calendar related tasks. Forwarding and receiving all mail/tasks on primary Exchange server is inconvenient because simple replying to original sender is disabled; and also when manually changing the recepient, he will receive mail from the wrong address. We were considering Virtualisation, that is setting up an instance of virtual machine inside existing installation and then joining this virtual computer to a second domain. Then installing another MS Outlook. This would of course mean two different Outlook accounts, two different calendars, but would at least enable our CEO to access all information from a single laptop. Does anyone have any other idea? I know setting up two domains on a single computer is a no-go (without much hacking at least), but effective workarounds are appreciate. The thing I am looking here is high usage/efficiency/productivity, but also as elegant solution from the administration point of view. Thank you very much (if you managed to read this through, this is a good sign ^_^ )

  Read the article

• Outbound mail issue during Exchange 2003 migration

  - by user27574

  Dear all, I am having an outbound email issue during the Exch 03 migration. Basically, we are migrating Exch03 to new hardware, both servers are Server 03 based. Everything runs smooth while setting up and installing Exch 03 on the new box. Public folders are all replicated. My issues are shown below.... 1) After starting to move users' mailboxes to new Exch 03, they receive some undeliverable mail and bounced back mail from some vendors, then I move few users back to test around, they have no problem at all after moving back to old Exch 03. 2) Another issue is our company has Blackberry users, we don't have BES. Under each user's mailboxes, we have forward rule setup, so that both user inbox and BB can receive email. User who is moved to the new Exch 03 server, they can only send email to the BB user's inbox, mail cannot be forwarded to BB at all, smtp queue stacks up and keep trying until the time is expired. Since not all emails that the users send out from the new Exch have problem, I am not able to narrow down what is the issue here. Can anyone give me some ideas? Could this be MX record / Reversed DNS relate? Or firewall NAT rule setting? Thanks.

  Read the article

• IIS SMTP server (Installed on local server) in parallel to Google Apps

  - by shaharru

  I am currently using free version of Google Apps for hosting my email.It works great for my official mails my email on Google is [email protected]. In addition I'm sending out high volume mails (registrations, forgotten passwords, newsletters etc) from the website (www.mydomain.com) using IIS SMTP installed on my windows machine. These emails are sent from [email protected] My problem is that when I send email from the website using IIS SMTP to a mail address [email protected] I don’t receive the email to Google apps. (I only receive these emails if I install a pop service on the server with the [email protected] email box). It seems that the IIS SMTP is ignoring the domain MX records and just delivers these emails to my local server. Here are my DNS records for domain.com: mydomain.com A 82.80.200.20 3600s mydomain.com TXT v=spf1 ip4: 82.80.200.20 a mx ptr include:aspmx.googlemail.com ~all mydomain.com MX preference: 10 exchange: aspmx2.googlemail.com 3600s mydomain.com MX preference: 10 exchange: aspmx3.googlemail.com 3600s mydomain.com MX preference: 10 exchange: aspmx4.googlemail.com 3600s mydomain.com MX preference: 10 exchange: aspmx5.googlemail.com 3600s mydomain.com MX preference: 1 exchange: aspmx.l.google.com 3600s mydomain.com MX preference: 5 exchange: alt1.aspmx.l.google.com 3600s mydomain.com MX preference: 5 exchange: alt2.aspmx.l.google.com 3600s Please help! Thanks.

  Read the article

• Can I convert an existing Firefox installation to ESR without a re-install?

  - by Iszi

  It took some jumping through hoops (including a mailing list subscription that I apparently didn't need) but I finally found where to download the Firefox ESR. This is great for fresh installs, but I was wondering if there's a way to simply convert existing installations to the ESR configuration without having to do a full install. As I understand it, the only difference between ESR and regular Firefox will be how they receive updates. After the new standard version of Firefox comes out, ESR releases will only receive critical security updates and bug fixes for the remainder of their support life. Newer versions of Firefox's standard build will have all the latest and greatest features, while ESR releases are meant to provide stability for environments that can't be expected to keep up with a new full version number change as often as Mozilla does them. In regular Firefox, the About screen shows that I am using the "release" update channel. Is switching to ESR really just a matter of switching the update channel? I presume this can be done in about:config by changing app.update.channel and probably also app.update.url. However, I don't know what these values should be for ESR or if anything else should be tweaked. So, is it possible to switch to ESR without a reinstall and, if so, how? (Note: While this question was written originally for Firefox 10, I expect any answers will apply to future ESR versions as well.)

  Read the article

• Too many concurrent connections Exchange 2010. What else is there to check?

  - by hydroparadise

  I thought that I had this under control before. But for some reason during our last email marketing promo, I start receiving from our mass email client (built in house).. The message could not be sent to the SMTP server. The transport error code is 0x800ccc67. The server repsonse was 421 4.3.2 The maximum number of concurrent connections has exceeded a limit, closing transmission channel again. There's several places I've checked to make sure that wouldn't be an issue. First I checked that receive connector was set to receive an adequate number of connections on our relay connector (1000 connections). Then, I would later find out about Throttling Policies. I created one and set all the properties I knew to set in terms of the policy following properties to 1000; EWSMaxConcurrency, OWAMaxConcurrency, CPAMaxConcurrency, and CPAMaxConcurrency. Still, the email client starts receiving the error shortly after 100 has been sent and takes about 15-30 seconds. The process is then repeatable, but still the error gets received at the same spot everytime. Is there a rate setting that I am missing? Was there a windows update that I missed looking at? Should the software have it's own throttling feature?

  Read the article

• Amazon EC2 Nat Instance - goes out but not back in

  - by nocode

  I've followed Amazon's steps and list what I've done. I've created 6 subnets (4 private SN1: 10.50.1.0/24, SN2: 10.50.2.0/24, SN3: 10.50.3.0/24, SN4: 10.50.4.0/24) and 2 public (SN5: 10.50.101.0/24 and SN6: 10.50.102.0/24) -I have a Bastion host and a NAT instance on SN5 and assigned EIP's to both. I created a test instance on SN1. edit: -NAT instance has source/destination check disabled -On the NAT instance, I had enabled the following commands to be bootstrapped: echo 1 > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -s 10.0.0.0/16 -j MASQUERADE -In my VPC, the private subnets have their own route table and configured 0.0.0.0/0 to the NAT instance with 4 subnets being associated with the route table. I have a second route table for my public subnets and 0.0.0.0/16 is pointed towards the IGW (with the other 2 subnets associated with it). -For Security Groups, I have the NAT instance accepting all traffic on each of the 4 subnets and all OUTBOUND traffic is allowed. For my test server, I have allowed all outbound access and have allowed all traffic from the public subnet of the NAT host. I can ping internally with no issues. On my test instance, if I try to ping google.com, DNS resolves however I don't get a reply back. On my NAT instance, I run a tcpdump and can see the request being requested to google.com but it's not sending the reply back. My NAT host can ping and receive a reply from google. From the test host, when I ping the NAT instance, the tcpdump shows a request and receive. Is there something I'm missing? EDIT: I've figured it out - I had to save the iptable config and restart the service.

  Read the article

• UDP blocked by Windows XP Firewall when sending to local machine

  - by user36367

  I work for a software development company but the issue doesn't seem to be programming-related. Here is my setup: Windows XP Professional with Service Pack 3, all updated Program that sends UDP datagrams Program that receives UDP datagrams Windows Firewall set to allow inbound UDP datagrams on a specific port (Scope: Subnet) If I send a UDP datagram on any port to other, similar machines, it goes through. If I send the UDP datagram to the same computer running the program that sends (whether using broadcast, localhost IP or the specific IP of the machine), the receiver program gets nothing. I've traced the problem down to the Windows XP Firewall, as Windows 7 does not have this problem (and I do not wish to sully my hands with Vista). If the exception I create for that UDP port in the WinXP firewall is set for a Scope of Subnet the datagram is blocked, but if I set it to All Computers or specifically enter my network settings (192.168.2.161 or 192.168.2.0/255.255.255.0) it works fine. Using different UDP ports makes no difference. I've tried different programs to reproduce this problem (ServerTalk to send and either IP Port Spy or PortPeeker to receive) to make sure it's not our code that's the issue, and those programs' datagrams were blocked as well. Also, that computer only has one network interface, so there are no additional network weirdness. I receive my IP from a DHCP server, so this is a straightforward setup. Given that it doesn't happen in Windows 7 I must assume it's a defect in the Windows XP Firewall, but I'd think someone else would have encountered this problem before. Has anyone encountered anything like this? Any ideas?

  Read the article

• Block SMTP session with sender domain which doesn't itself accept SMTP connection.

  - by bignose

  I'm administrating a mail service for a small business. Their mail host's internet connection is an ADSL service with a permanent IP address. Unfortunately, many misconfigured mail systems will happily deliver to this host, but, when the host attempts to send mail back (e.g. a bounce notice, or a normal response from someone), the declared sender's domain has an MX which refuses to receive connections from this host. That misconfiguration makes their system a one-way mail sender, which is a problem. How can I configure Postfix on this customer's mail host to refuse SMTP sessions that declare a sender domain which itself refuses SMTP from this host? That is, if the SMTP client declares a domain that we can't make SMTP connections back to, then there's not much point accepting the incoming connection in the first place. Note that I'm not, as some commenters have assumed, talking about checking whether the SMTP client will receive messages. The check I want is whether the declared sender's domain (regardless of who the current SMTP client is) will accept SMTP connections from here. In other words: when we get around to sending a message back, we'll need the sender's domain to accept SMTP connections; I want to do that check before accepting the incoming session. I'm imagining a late check (after the low-cost checks to winnow most of the rubbish connections) that keeps the client on the other end while it attempts an SMTP client connection back to the declared domain of the sender. If that connection is rejected, the incoming one is also rejected. I'm also open to other suggestions for how this problem might be addressed (short of not using this mail host at all, which isn't an option).

  Read the article

• Linux: Send mail to external mail box from a server with that user's hostname

  - by dtbarne

  I've got sendmail running on a linux box. Let's say the hostname of the box is bar.com. If I run the following command, I don't receive the email (which is hosted with a third party), presumably due to the hostname pointing to the local machine. echo "Test Body" | mail -s "Test Subject" [email protected] Is there any way to get this to work so that I can receive emails at my third party email address even though it has the same hostname? Do I have to change the hostname of this server (not preferred)? It may be worth noting that I created a user "foo" on my machine and noticed that the mailbox for that account is empty. I noticed these log entries, which may or may not be relevant: Jun 28 01:09:48 bar sendmail[14338]: p5S59min014338: from=apache, size=80, class=0, nrcpts=1, msgid=<[email protected]>, relay=apache@localhost Jun 28 01:09:48 bar sendmail[14339]: p5S59mIA014339: from=<[email protected]>, size=293, class=0, nrcpts=1, msgid=<[email protected]>, proto=ESMTP, daemon=MTA, relay=localhost.localdomain [127.0.$ Jun 28 01:09:48 bar sendmail[14338]: p5S59min014338: [email protected], ctladdr=apache (48/48), delay=00:00:00, xdelay=00:00:00, mailer=relay, pri=30080, relay=[127.0.0.1] [127.0.0.1], dsn=2.0.0, stat=Sent (p5S59mIA$ Jun 28 01:09:48 bar sendmail[14340]: p5S59mIA014339: to=<[email protected]>, ctladdr=<[email protected]> (48/48), delay=00:00:00, xdelay=00:00:00, mailer=local, pri=30495, dsn=2.0.0, stat=Sent

  Read the article

• UDP blocked by Windows XP Firewall when sending to local machine

  - by user36367

  Hi there, I work for a software development company but the issue doesn't seem to be programming-related. Here is my setup: - Windows XP Professional with Service Pack 3, all updated - Program that sends UDP datagrams - Program that receives UDP datagrams - Windows Firewall set to allow inbound UDP datagrams on a specific port (Scope: Subnet) If I send a UDP datagram on any port to other, similar machines, it goes through. If I send the UDP datagram to the same computer running the program that sends (whether using broadcast, localhost IP or the specific IP of the machine), the receiver program gets nothing. I've traced the problem down to the Windows XP Firewall, as Windows 7 does not have this problem (and I do not wish to sully my hands with Vista). If the exception I create for that UDP port in the WinXP firewall is set for a Scope of Subnet the datagram is blocked, but if I set it to All Computers or specifically enter my network settings (192.168.2.161 or 192.168.2.0/255.255.255.0) it works fine. Using different UDP ports makes no difference. I've tried different programs to reproduce this problem (ServerTalk to send and either IP Port Spy or PortPeeker to receive) to make sure it's not our code that's the issue, and those programs' datagrams were blocked as well. Also, that computer only has one network interface, so there are no additional network weirdness. I receive my IP from a DHCP server, so this is a straightforward setup. Given that it doesn't happen in Windows 7 I must assume it's a defect in the Windows XP Firewall, but I'd think someone else would have encountered this problem before. Has anyone encountered anything like this? Any ideas? Thanks in advance!

  Read the article

• OwnCloud RSA certificate configured for SERVER- ISSUE, webpage has a redirect loop

  - by jmituzas

  I had Owncloud running on a server that had died, I remember installing being easy, I have migrated server and Owncloud is one of the last apps to install. Ok Just downloaded and installed the newest version of Owncloud on a Ubuntu 14.04 server with PHP 5.5.9-1, I am trying the manual install. I have tried adding repo and installing from apt-get install owncloud, did not work for me :/, whereis owncloud reported nothing. It's installed but never was able to bring up site. Now for my issue I finished the manual install from .tar.bz2 when it came time to login I receive "This webpage has a redirect loop" , I receive the error from Chrome and Safari web browsers. I can't login at all, with no user, I get the error page. Don't know if it is related or not but here's a look at the owncloud-error.log "RSA certificate configured for "mysite.com" Does NOT include an ID which matches the server name" Installed new ssl cert with CN as my ServerName directive in the vhost config file, same error :/ Re-installed owncloud same issue... Out of ideas. Thanks in advance, jmituzas

  Read the article

• Why doesn't Mail.app properly thread Microsoft Outlook replies?

  - by thepurplepixel

  I use Mail.app 3.6 (on 10.5 Leopard), and I always use plain-text email. Normally, when I receive an email reply from practically anyone, it looks like this (test message sent from Mail.app, replied from Hotmail, replied from Google Apps): Needless to say, I quite like this threading, and it keeps everything very visually-organized. However, when I receive a plain-text email reply from people on Microsoft Outlook (tested with Outlook 2003 & 2007), it isn't threaded like the image. Instead, it appears as below, without being threaded nicely. My reply to the message. -----Original Message----- From: Tyson Moore [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: [Date] To: [Receiver] Subject: Test Original message. Through looking at the source of my original message, it appears as though every time the message is quoted, less-than signs (<) are inserted before every line in the reply. I am assuming this is what triggers the quoting behaviour exhibited by Mail.app, but I'm no expert. My question: is this a Mail.app limitation in not recognizing the -----Original Message----- line put in by Outlook, or an Outlook problem not inserting > before every line in a reply (or both)?

  Read the article

• How to configure a large mtu (linux)

  - by Somejan

  I have a gigabit ethernet connection from my laptop to my router, and a working ipv6 connection to the internet. I can receive very large packets from sites on the internet, with sizes up to at least 10000 bytes (according to wireshark). (edit: turns out to be linux's 'generic receive offload') However, when trying to send anything, my local computer fragments at just below 1500 bytes for ipv6. (On ipv4, I can send tcp packets to the internet of at least 1514 bytes, I can ping with packets up to the configured mtu of 6128 but they are blackholed.) I'm on ubuntu 12.04. I have configured an mtu for my eth0 of 6128 (the maximum it accepts), both using ip link set dev eth0 mtu 6128 and in the NetworkManager applet gui, and restarted the connection. ip link show eth0 shows the 6128 mtu is indeed set. ip -6 route shows that none of the paths the kernel knows about have an mtu set. I can ping over ipv4 with packets up to 6128 bytes (though I don't get responses), but when I do ping6 myrouter -c3 -s1500 -Mdo I get error replies from my own computer saying that the packets are too large and the mtu is 1480. I have confirmed with Wireshark that nothing is put on the wire, and the replies are indeed generated by my own computer. So, how do I get my computer to use the larger mtu?

  Read the article

• IPv6 Addresses causing Exchange Relay whitelists to fail

  - by makerofthings7

  Several of our new Exchange servers are failing to relay messages because it is communicating over IPv6 and not matching any receive connector I previously set up. I'm not sure how we are using IP6 since we only have a IPv4 network and we are routing across subnets. I discovered this by typing helo in from the source to the server that is confused by my IP6 address. I saw the IPv6 message and the custom message I gave this receive connector. (connectors with more permission have a different helo) 220 HUB01 client helo asdf 250 HUB01.nfp.com Hello [fe80::cd8:6087:7b1e:99d4%11] More info about my environment: I have two dedicated Exchange forests each with a distinct purpose. They have no trust and only communicate by SMTP. They both share the same DNS infrastructure via stub zones. What are my options? This is my guess, but I'm no IPv6 expert so I don't know which one is the best option Disable IPv6 Add the IPv6 address to the whitelist (isn't that IP dynamic?) Tell Exchange to use IPv4 instead Figure out why we are using IPv6 instead of IP4

  Read the article

• Why would e-mail from our own domain not be forwarded to gmail

  - by netboffin

  To solve a problem with spam on our server we tried to forward e-mail from our dedicated server's mailserver(matrix smtp service) to gmail, but while most e-mails got through e-mail from our own domain all went missing. They weren't in the inbox or spam or anywhere else. We've had to go back to using the old system, which means my boss gets a huge amount of spam. We have a windows 2003 server with iis 6 and the matrix smtp service installed. I've toyed with the idea of installing a mail proxy like ASSP but it looks pretty complicated. We're hosting 20 domains on the server as well as our own which has an online shop whose payment system depends on email. I can't start playing around with complicated solutions when it could have disastrous consequences and I don't know enough to implement them safely. So my question has two parts: Part One: Why can't we forward e-mails from people using the same domain. If our domain was foobar.com then [email protected] can't receive from [email protected], but he can receive from everyone else. Part Two: Is there a really simple server side solution to spam that would work with matrix? For instance popfile?

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46  | Next Page >