mycingular.net verification failed: Name or service not known

[Dan Schaefer-3]

One of my coworkers would like to send emails from her blackberry using
the work mail server and her work address. Whenever she attempts to send
a message, I get the following error messages in the mail log:
Nov  4 13:28:35 pony postfix/smtpd[26853]: warning: 32.144.231.15:
hostname mobile-032-144-231-015.mycingular.net verification failed: Name
or service not known
Nov  4 13:28:35 pony postfix/smtpd[26853]: connect from
unknown[32.144.231.15]
Nov  4 13:28:38 pony postfix/smtpd[26853]: disconnect from
unknown[32.144.231.15]

This apparently is a DNS problem:
[root@pony ~]# host mobile-032-144-231-015.mycingular.net
Host mobile-032-144-231-015.mycingular.net not found: 3(NXDOMAIN)


I was wondering if errors like this could be ignored as long as her
phone is setup to authenticate before sending messages?
Thanks in advance.

--
Dan Schaefer
Web Developer/Systems Analyst
Performance Administration Corp.

[Victor Duchovni]

On Wed, Nov 04, 2009 at 02:22:29PM -0500, Dan Schaefer wrote:

> One of my coworkers would like to send emails from her blackberry using the
> work mail server and her work address. Whenever she attempts to send a
> message, I get the following error messages in the mail log:

It is not an "error" message, it is a *warning*.

> Nov  4 13:28:35 pony postfix/smtpd[26853]: warning: 32.144.231.15: hostname
> mobile-032-144-231-015.mycingular.net verification failed: Name or service
> not known
> Nov  4 13:28:35 pony postfix/smtpd[26853]: connect from
> unknown[32.144.231.15]
> Nov  4 13:28:38 pony postfix/smtpd[26853]: disconnect from
> unknown[32.144.231.15]
>
> This apparently is a DNS problem:
> [root@pony ~]# host mobile-032-144-231-015.mycingular.net
> Host mobile-032-144-231-015.mycingular.net not found: 3(NXDOMAIN)
>
> I was wondering if errors like this could be ignored as long as her phone
> is setup to authenticate before sending messages?

The "error" (actually "warning") is ignored, but logged, so that you
later understand why the client address is logged as unknown, and why any
restrictions that object to "unknown" clients may reject the transaction,
(if you use such restrictions).

--
        Viktor.

Disclaimer: off-list followups get on-list replies or get ignored.
Please do not ignore the "Reply-To" header.

To unsubscribe from the postfix-users list, visit
http://www.postfix.org/lists.html or click the link below:
<mailto:majordomo@...?body=unsubscribe%20postfix-users>

If my response solves your problem, the best way to thank me is to not
send an "it worked, thanks" follow-up. If you must respond, please put
"It worked, thanks" in the "Subject" so I can delete these quickly.

[lst_hoe02]

Zitat von Dan Schaefer <dan@...>:

> One of my coworkers would like to send emails from her blackberry  
> using the work mail server and her work address. Whenever she  
> attempts to send a message, I get the following error messages in  
> the mail log:
> Nov  4 13:28:35 pony postfix/smtpd[26853]: warning: 32.144.231.15:  
> hostname mobile-032-144-231-015.mycingular.net verification failed:  
> Name or service not known
> Nov  4 13:28:35 pony postfix/smtpd[26853]: connect from  
> unknown[32.144.231.15]
> Nov  4 13:28:38 pony postfix/smtpd[26853]: disconnect from  
> unknown[32.144.231.15]
>
> This apparently is a DNS problem:
> [root@pony ~]# host mobile-032-144-231-015.mycingular.net
> Host mobile-032-144-231-015.mycingular.net not found: 3(NXDOMAIN)
>
>
> I was wondering if errors like this could be ignored as long as her  
> phone is setup to authenticate before sending messages?

Yes, it simply means that the internet provider which is used by the  
phone have not setup reverse DNS.


Regards

Andreas

[Dan Schaefer-3]

Victor Duchovni wrote:

On Wed, Nov 04, 2009 at 02:22:29PM -0500, Dan Schaefer wrote:
  

It is not an "error" message, it is a *warning*.

My apologies.

The "error" (actually "warning") is ignored, but logged, so that you
later understand why the client address is logged as unknown, and why any
restrictions that object to "unknown" clients may reject the transaction,
(if you use such restrictions).

  

What setting(s) in Postfix, if any, need to be changed in order for the sending of the email to be successful?

[Victor Duchovni]

On Wed, Nov 04, 2009 at 03:06:59PM -0500, Dan Schaefer wrote:

> Victor Duchovni wrote:
>> On Wed, Nov 04, 2009 at 02:22:29PM -0500, Dan Schaefer wrote:
>>   It is not an "error" message, it is a *warning*.
> My apologies.
>>
>> The "error" (actually "warning") is ignored, but logged, so that you
>> later understand why the client address is logged as unknown, and why any
>> restrictions that object to "unknown" clients may reject the transaction,
>> (if you use such restrictions).
>>
>>  
> What setting(s) in Postfix, if any, need to be changed in order for the
> sending of the email to be successful?

No changes required. This "warning" does not adversely impact the
delivery of email, unless you go out of your way (non-default setting)
to deny access to clients with unverifiable PTR records.

--
        Viktor.

Disclaimer: off-list followups get on-list replies or get ignored.
Please do not ignore the "Reply-To" header.

To unsubscribe from the postfix-users list, visit
http://www.postfix.org/lists.html or click the link below:
<mailto:majordomo@...?body=unsubscribe%20postfix-users>

If my response solves your problem, the best way to thank me is to not
send an "it worked, thanks" follow-up. If you must respond, please put
"It worked, thanks" in the "Subject" so I can delete these quickly.

[Stan Hoeppner]

Dan Schaefer put forth on 11/4/2009 2:06 PM:

> What setting(s) in Postfix, if any, need to be changed in order for the
> sending of the email to be successful?

Please paste the entire transaction.  You're not showing a rejection or
a queued delivery in your log snippet.  One example of each, for reference:

Nov  4 14:09:42 greer postfix/smtpd[3818]: connect from
cluster3.marcatel.net.mx[200.56.224.17]
Nov  4 14:09:42 greer postfix/smtpd[3818]: NOQUEUE: reject: RCPT from
cluster3.marcatel.net.mx[200.56.224.17]: 550 5.1.1
<goetzgqerzwjf.wk@...>: Recipient address rejected: User
unknown in relay recipient table; from=<beethoven@...>
to=<goetzgqerzwjf.wk@...> proto=SMTP
helo=<cluster3.marcatel.net.mx>
Nov  4 14:09:43 greer postfix/smtpd[3818]: lost connection after RCPT
from cluster3.marcatel.net.mx[200.56.224.17]


Nov  4 14:03:25 greer postfix/smtpd[3794]: connect from
russian-caravan.cloud9.net[168.100.1.4]
Nov  4 14:03:27 greer postgrey: action=pass, reason=triplet found,
client_name=russian-caravan.cloud9.net, client_address=168.100.1.4,
sender=owner-postfix-users@..., recipient=stan@...
Nov  4 14:03:27 greer postfix/smtpd[3794]: 5B33E3DA123:
client=russian-caravan.cloud9.net[168.100.1.4]
Nov  4 14:03:27 greer postfix/cleanup[3798]: 5B33E3DA123:
message-id=<20091104200301.GC27037@...>
Nov  4 14:03:27 greer postfix/smtpd[3794]: disconnect from
russian-caravan.cloud9.net[168.100.1.4]
Nov  4 14:03:27 greer postfix/qmgr[3501]: 5B33E3DA123:
from=<owner-postfix-users@...>, size=5903, nrcpt=1 (queue active)
Nov  4 14:03:28 greer postfix/smtp[3799]: 5B33E3DA123:
to=<stan@...>, relay=192.168.100.2[192.168.100.2]:25,
delay=2.9, delays=2.3/0.03/0.13/0.42, dsn=2.0.0, status=sent (250 OK)
Nov  4 14:03:28 greer postfix/qmgr[3501]: 5B33E3DA123: removed

--
Stan

[Dan Schaefer-3]

Stan Hoeppner wrote:

Dan Schaefer put forth on 11/4/2009 2:06 PM:

  

What setting(s) in Postfix, if any, need to be changed in order for the
sending of the email to be successful?
    

Please paste the entire transaction.  You're not showing a rejection or
a queued delivery in your log snippet.  One example of each, for reference:

Nov  4 14:09:42 greer postfix/smtpd[3818]: connect from
cluster3.marcatel.net.mx[200.56.224.17]
Nov  4 14:09:42 greer postfix/smtpd[3818]: NOQUEUE: reject: RCPT from
cluster3.marcatel.net.mx[200.56.224.17]: 550 5.1.1
goetzgqerzwjf.wk@...: Recipient address rejected: User
unknown in relay recipient table; from=beethoven@...
to=goetzgqerzwjf.wk@... proto=SMTP
helo=<cluster3.marcatel.net.mx>
Nov  4 14:09:43 greer postfix/smtpd[3818]: lost connection after RCPT
from cluster3.marcatel.net.mx[200.56.224.17]


Nov  4 14:03:25 greer postfix/smtpd[3794]: connect from
russian-caravan.cloud9.net[168.100.1.4]
Nov  4 14:03:27 greer postgrey: action=pass, reason=triplet found,
client_name=russian-caravan.cloud9.net, client_address=168.100.1.4,
sender=owner-postfix-users@..., recipient=stan@...
Nov  4 14:03:27 greer postfix/smtpd[3794]: 5B33E3DA123:
client=russian-caravan.cloud9.net[168.100.1.4]
Nov  4 14:03:27 greer postfix/cleanup[3798]: 5B33E3DA123:
message-id=20091104200301.GC27037@...
Nov  4 14:03:27 greer postfix/smtpd[3794]: disconnect from
russian-caravan.cloud9.net[168.100.1.4]
Nov  4 14:03:27 greer postfix/qmgr[3501]: 5B33E3DA123:
from=owner-postfix-users@..., size=5903, nrcpt=1 (queue active)
Nov  4 14:03:28 greer postfix/smtp[3799]: 5B33E3DA123:
to=stan@..., relay=192.168.100.2[192.168.100.2]:25,
delay=2.9, delays=2.3/0.03/0.13/0.42, dsn=2.0.0, status=sent (250 OK)
Nov  4 14:03:28 greer postfix/qmgr[3501]: 5B33E3DA123: removed

--
Stan
  

The OP was all I had in the log for that transaction.

[Stan Hoeppner]

Dan Schaefer put forth on 11/4/2009 2:18 PM:

> The OP was all I had in the log for that transaction.

If that's truly the case then your Postfix is horribly broken.  Every
inbound message must/will either be rejected by smtpd, or accepted and
queued for delivery, or deferred by, qmgr.  There should always be a log
entry stating the disposition of each message.  Any logging at all is
useless without this.

Either it's in there and you can't locate it, or you've totally hosed
Postfix's logging somehow.  Stop grepping for the message ID and cat the
file, looking manually for all the entries around that transaction
timestamp.

--
Stan

[Noel Jones-2]

On 11/4/2009 4:13 PM, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
> Dan Schaefer put forth on 11/4/2009 2:18 PM:
>
>> The OP was all I had in the log for that transaction.
>
> If that's truly the case then your Postfix is horribly broken.  Every
> inbound message must/will either be rejected by smtpd, or accepted and
> queued for delivery, or deferred by, qmgr.  There should always be a log
> entry stating the disposition of each message.  Any logging at all is
> useless without this.

Don't slam the OP just yet...

It's very possible the mail client disconnected for some
reason.  As one guess, maybe the client is configured to
require TLS but the server doesn't offer it, so the client
disconnects.  In that case, there wouldn't be a "reject: ..."
message in the log.

Adding the client to debug_peer_list will probably give more
information.

OP can grep the log for the smtpd process ID around the time
in question to make sure nothing was missed.


   -- Noel Jones

[mouss-4]

Dan Schaefer a écrit :
> One of my coworkers would like to send emails from her blackberry using
> the work mail server and her work address. Whenever she attempts to send
> a message, I get the following error messages in the mail log:
> Nov  4 13:28:35 pony postfix/smtpd[26853]: warning: 32.144.231.15:
> hostname mobile-032-144-231-015.mycingular.net verification failed: Name
> or service not known

that's an "informational" warning, nothing more.

> Nov  4 13:28:35 pony postfix/smtpd[26853]: connect from
> unknown[32.144.231.15]
> Nov  4 13:28:38 pony postfix/smtpd[26853]: disconnect from
> unknown[32.144.231.15]

for some reason, the client disconnected without attemtping to send mail.

>
> This apparently is a DNS problem:

No. the DNS issue is just a warning. if you look at your logs, you'll
probably find that you receive mail from clients with reverse dns issues.

> [root@pony ~]# host mobile-032-144-231-015.mycingular.net
> Host mobile-032-144-231-015.mycingular.net not found: 3(NXDOMAIN)
>
>
> I was wondering if errors like this could be ignored as long as her
> phone is setup to authenticate before sending messages?

By default, mail is accepted even if the client IP doesn't resolve.

time to reread the list welcome message, and provide infos about your
setup, ... etc.

note that your postfix and your client need to "agree" on tls &
authentication methods. if they disagree, your client will disconnect.

[Dan Schaefer-3]

Stan Hoeppner wrote:

Dan Schaefer put forth on 11/4/2009 2:18 PM:

  

The OP was all I had in the log for that transaction.
    

Stop grepping for the message ID and cat the
file, looking manually for all the entries around that transaction
timestamp.

--
Stan
  

Actually, I was tailing the maillog with the -f option as she sent the mail and the 3 lines I posted, were all I saw.

I suspect that Mouss? is correct in saying that the client and server need to agree on TLS and authentication. Unfortunately, my coworker informed me that she is not keeping her phone for very much longer and said that I can abandon the research. Oh well. I could have gotten the answer for her. I appreciated all the responses anyway.