> On Mon, Sep 08, 2003 at 02:20:11PM -0500, Gary wrote: > > Here is what I am thinking... 1. You mentioned you can send via other > > MUAs, pine, etc, so I am inclined to think that your SMTP auth is set up > > properly in Sendmail... 2. Given this, I still think it could be a Mutt > > problem.. I think you are getting a null Auth return because Mutt is not > > sending your password in order to auth the SMTP transaction, and it is > > getting bounced. > > The only confusing thing there is that Mutt doesn't do anything to > authenticate to SMTP; neither does Pine or any other mailer we use. > Initially I wanted to set that up, but as things are now, we don't use > that. You could still be right; I must be overlooking something. > > > the only other thing I can think of, to rule out Sendmail as a cause, is > > to log the entire SMTP transaction, say using Pine and Mutt with your > > problem server. > > Here's a sample of that, from Mutt. I replaced the company name in > the banner with [companyName]. > > 220 webshielde250.[companyName] WebShielde250/SMTP Ready. > EHLO kirk.dlee.org > 250-DSN > 250-AUTH LOGIN > 250-AUTH=LOGIN > 250 ESMTP OK > MAIL From:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> AUTH=<> > 501 Syntax error - badly formatted address > quit > 221 Closing connection > > The only difference from Pine is the " AUTH=<>" at the end of "MAIL > From:" is not there, and it works...
Sendmail is barfing on the AUTH=<> clause. Although allowed by the RFC (http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc2554.html), sendmail's refusal may well be valid since you haven't actually entered authenticated SMTP mode. (In this case, issuing a AUTH LOGIN before the MAIL FROM.) The reason why your other MUAs work is beacuse they simply don't send the AUTH=<> token if they're not doing authenticated SMTP. -- Matt Emmerton _______________________________________________ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
