×
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR COMPUTER PROFESSIONALS

Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you a
Computer / IT professional?
Join Tek-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!
  • Students Click Here

*Tek-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Students Click Here

Jobs

Lost input channel from ...

Lost input channel from ...

Lost input channel from ...

(OP)
Hi
I do support Solaris 8 machine that was installed on it Sendmail version "11.8.0,REV=2000.01.08.18.12"(output from pkginfo -l)
I did ask to from my manager to make this box to receive mails from outlook.
So I did added the following line to senmail.cf :
"O DaemonPortOptions=Port=smtp,Addr=140.6.20.22, Name=MTA"
When 140.6.20.22 is my host IP Address.
It worked fine after our exchange admin did some changes in the exchange config and all was good.
Suddenly without anything obvious mails stopped reaching from outlook to this machine, although other hosts not experiencing any kind of this or else problem.
I did look at the mail.log and below is the output:
Can anyone help?
Can anyone point to something, give suggestion or clue?
Any response will be highly appreciated!


the output from the log:
36 <<< 220 utest02 LMTP ready^M
08536 >>> LHLO utest02.domain
08536 <<< 250-utest02^M
08536 <<< 250-8BITMIME^M
08536 <<< 250-ENHANCEDSTATUSCODES^M
08536 <<< 250 PIPELINING^M
08536 >>> MAIL From:<root@uprod03.domain>
08536 <<< 250 2.5.0 ok^M
08536 >>> RCPT To:<tsqr>
08536 <<< 250 2.1.5 ok^M
08536 >>> DATA
08536 <<< 354 go ahead^M
08536 >>> Return-Path: <root@uprod03.domain>
08536 >>> Received: from uprod03.domain (uprod03 [140.5.21.3])
08536 >>>       by utest02.domain (8.11.7+Sun/8.11.7) with ESMTP id n2JDRob08518
08536 >>>       for <tsqr@utest02.domain>; Thu, 19 Mar 2009 15:27:50 +0200 (GMT)
08536 >>> Received: (from root@localhost)
08536 >>>       by uprod03.domain (8.11.7+Sun/8.11.7) id n2JDWbD07788
08536 >>>       for tsqr@utest02; Thu, 19 Mar 2009 15:32:37 +0200 (GMT)
08536 >>> Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2009 15:32:37 +0200 (GMT)
08536 >>> From: Super-User <root@uprod03.domain>
08536 >>> Message-Id: <200903191332.n2JDWbD07788@uprod03.domain>
08536 >>> Content-Type: text
08536 >>>
08536 >>> test
08536 >>>
08536 >>> .
08536 <<< 250 2.1.5 tsqr OK^M
08536 >>> QUIT
08536 <<< 221 2.0.0 bye^M
08510 <<< QUIT^M
08510 >>> 221 2.0.0 utest02.domain closing connection
18974 >>> 220 utest02.domain ESMTP Sendmail 8.11.7+Sun/8.11.7; Mon, 30 Mar 2009 13:05:47 +0200 (GMT)
18974 <<< [EOF]
18974 >>> 421 4.4.1 utest02.domain Lost input channel from wedex01.eds.co.il [140.4.20.90]
23432 >>> 220 utest02.domain ESMTP Sendmail 8.11.7+Sun/8.11.7; Mon, 30 Mar 2009 13:06:47 +0200 (GMT)
23432 <<< [EOF]
23432 >>> 421 4.4.1 utest02.domain Lost input channel from wedex01.eds.co.il [140.4.20.90]
15955 >>> 220 utest02.domain ESMTP Sendmail 8.11.7+Sun/8.11.7; Mon, 30 Mar 2009 13:17:48 +0200 (GMT)
15955 <<< [EOF]
15955 >>> 421 4.4.1 utest02.domain Lost input channel from wedex01.eds.co.il [140.4.20.90]
02452 >>> 220 utest02.domain ESMTP Sendmail 8.11.7+Sun/8.11.7; Mon, 30 Mar 2009 13:27:49 +0200 (GMT)
02452 <<< [EOF]
02452 >>> 421 4.4.1 utest02.domain Lost input channel from wedex01.eds.co.il [140.4.20.90]
25271 >>> 220 utest02.domain ESMTP Sendmail 8.11.7+Sun/8.11.7; Mon, 30 Mar 2009 13:32:46 +0200 (GMT)
25271 <<< [EOF]
25271 >>> 421 4.4.1 utest02.domain Lost input channel from wedex01.eds.co.il [140.4.20.90]
29607 >>> 220 utest02.domain ESMTP Sendmail 8.11.7+Sun/8.11.7; Mon, 30 Mar 2009 13:33:46 +0200 (GMT)
29607 <<< [EOF]
29607 >>> 421 4.4.1 utest02.domain Lost input channel from wedex01.eds.co.il [140.4.20.90]
03998 >>> 220 utest02.domain ESMTP Sendmail 8.11.7+Sun/8.11.7; Mon, 30 Mar 2009 13:34:46 +0200 (GMT)
 

RE: Lost input channel from ...

(OP)
Hi
Can anyone look at above?
Look like not very problematic case for the repliers at this forum.
I did check at Google and it says something about spammers.
Any help, advice, clue will be highly appreciated!
 

Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Tek-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Tek-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Tek-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Tek-Tips and talk with other members! Already a Member? Login

Close Box

Join Tek-Tips® Today!

Join your peers on the Internet's largest technical computer professional community.
It's easy to join and it's free.

Here's Why Members Love Tek-Tips Forums:

Register now while it's still free!

Already a member? Close this window and log in.

Join Us             Close