On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 07:39:46PM +0200, Jan Stary wrote:
> Through my smtpd, I am sending an email to an address
> in the fjfi.cvut.cz domain. The email get delivered alright,
> but the maillog message is strange:
> 
> Jun 13 19:32:08 mini smtpd[7138]: 93fe4a4f: from=<r...@mini.stare.cz>, 
> size=427, nrcpts=1, proto=ESMTP, relay=0@localhost [IPv6:::1]
> Jun 13 19:32:10 mini smtpd[6586]: 93fe4a4f700df332: 
> to=<jan.st...@fjfi.cvut.cz>, delay=2, relay=n003-000-000-000.static.ge.com 
> [147.32.9.3], stat=Sent (2.0.0 Ok: queued as CECD3C0083)
> 
> $ host -t mx fjfi.cvut.cz.         
> fjfi.cvut.cz mail is handled by 70 brk1.fjfi.cvut.cz.
> fjfi.cvut.cz mail is handled by 30 mailgw1.fjfi.cvut.cz.
> fjfi.cvut.cz mail is handled by 50 mailgw2.fjfi.cvut.cz.
> fjfi.cvut.cz mail is handled by 60 brk2.fjfi.cvut.cz.
> 
> So smtpd correctly chooses the first priority MX, which is 
> 
> $ host mailgw1.fjfi.cvut.cz.
> mailgw1.fjfi.cvut.cz has address 147.32.9.3
> 
> $ host 147.32.9.3
> 3.9.32.147.in-addr.arpa domain name pointer mailgw1.fjfi.cvut.cz.
> 
> All the resolvers in my /etc/resolv.conf resolve
> mailgw1.fjfi.cvut.cz. to 147.32.9.3 and back, as above.
> 
> So how did "relay=n003-000-000-000.static.ge.com [147.32.9.3]"
> get into the log? Am I missing something?
> 
>       Jan

That's an endianness issue. I thought I fixed that already...
Can you try this?

Eric.

Index: sockaddr.c
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/src/usr.sbin/smtpd/sockaddr.c,v
retrieving revision 1.4
diff -u -p -u -r1.4 sockaddr.c
--- sockaddr.c  16 May 2011 10:57:41 -0000      1.4
+++ sockaddr.c  13 Jun 2012 18:40:52 -0000
@@ -114,7 +114,7 @@ sockaddr_as_fqdn(const struct sockaddr *
 
        switch (sa->sa_family) {
        case AF_INET:
-               addr = ((const struct sockaddr_in *)sa)->sin_addr.s_addr;
+               addr = ntohl(((const struct sockaddr_in *)sa)->sin_addr.s_addr);
                snprintf(dst, max,
                    "%d.%d.%d.%d.in-addr.arpa.",
                    (addr >> 24) & 0xff,

Reply via email to