Selcuk Yazar:
> postfix/smtpd[6055]: lost connection after DATA (3865 bytes) from
> mx2.iparadigms.com[199.47.85.44]
Possible cause:
- Broken WSCALE (window scaling).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TCP_window_scale_option
Less likely, because the failure happened after 3865 bytes:
- Broken MTU
Viktor Dukhovni:
> On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 09:51:39AM +0200, Alvaro Mar?n wrote:
>
> > The problem is that there is no way to see what has happened with an
> > email searching the queue ID in the logs (in scripts or apps to trace
> > emails, for example). It would be usefull add that queue ID to t
Just scanning this thread, are you seeing the mail is actually failing
or is the log just concerning you?
I had a similar issue not too long ago that sounds like it could be
the same issue, where there's no obvious problem but you get an smtp
error at different parts of the injection process, like
On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 09:51:39AM +0200, Alvaro Mar?n wrote:
> The problem is that there is no way to see what has happened with an
> email searching the queue ID in the logs (in scripts or apps to trace
> emails, for example). It would be usefull add that queue ID to the "lost
> connection error
El 19/06/14 09:24, Viktor Dukhovni escribió:
> On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 09:06:34AM +0200, Alvaro Mar?n wrote:
>
>> Jun 19 08:43:37 postfix/smtpd[26460]: connect from unknown[x]
>> Jun 19 08:43:46 postfix/smtpd[26460]: 7EAD855B8355: client=unknown[x]
>> Jun 19 08:43:55 postfix/smtpd[26460]: lost con
On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 09:06:34AM +0200, Alvaro Mar?n wrote:
> Jun 19 08:43:37 postfix/smtpd[26460]: connect from unknown[x]
> Jun 19 08:43:46 postfix/smtpd[26460]: 7EAD855B8355: client=unknown[x]
> Jun 19 08:43:55 postfix/smtpd[26460]: lost connection after DATA (17 bytes)
> from unknown[x]
> J
Bennie Joubert:
> Hi
>
> Why would postfix log "lost connection after DATA from
> ns.0.us.jsdaav.net[98.158.177.54]" after receiving a mail that contains
> the following hyperlink?
Because something decides to break the connection and it isn't Postfix.
Look for "security" products such as firew
> > May 13 04:09:23 host01 postfix/smtpd[10301]: lost connection after RCPT from
> unknown[190.107.112.194]
>
> Listed on SpamHaus XBL
>
> Unless these listings postdate your log entries, you should probably
> not allow these clients to get as far as "DATA".
>
> reject_rbl_client zen.spamh
On Fri, May 14, 2010 at 11:20:47AM -0700, Gary Smith wrote:
> May 13 04:08:33 host01 postfix/smtpd[10912]: lost connection after DATA from
> unknown[82.178.110.201]
Listed on SpamHaus XBL and PBL
> May 13 04:08:34 host01 postfix/smtpd[10409]: lost connection after RCPT from
> unknown[109.96.25
> This strongly suggests that you have is a 10 second time limit
> on the life time of NAT/VPS/whatever state.
>
> Wietse
Makes complete sense. I will bounce it off the ipvsadm list. They don't tend
to respond much as of recent.
BTW, I did notice, while analyzing some of the logs, tha
Gary Smith:
> May 13 18:48:33 host01 postfix/smtpd[18110]: connect from sender[senderip]
> May 13 18:48:33 host01 postfix/smtpd[18110]: setting up TLS connection from
> sender[senderip]
> May 13 18:48:33 host01 postfix/smtpd[18110]: Anonymous TLS connection
> established from sender[senderip]: TL
Gary Smith:
> > If the NAT assumes that everything is a web client and drops
> > connections after a few seconds, then Postfix will report lost
> > connections.
> >
> > If the NAT keeps connections open but it is a crappy box that can
> > maintain state for only 100 connections, then it will be fo
> Have you disabled window scaling on your Postfix server. Lost connections
> are often the result of firewalls mangling "advanced" TCP features.
>
> - Disable window scaling
> - Disable ECN
>
I don't believe we have disabled any of the advanced features. That will give
me something to
On Fri, May 14, 2010 at 09:23:12AM -0700, Gary Smith wrote:
> I'm sure it's not a probable with postfix, I'm just looking for postfix
> cases where they have overcome this type of config issue.
Have you disabled window scaling on your Postfix server. Lost connections
are often the result of firew
Weitse,
For some reason, random mails from you pop up in my inbox, instead of my
postfix list instead delivery on behalf of postfix-users@postfix.org like most
others. Just an FYI
> If the NAT assumes that everything is a web client and drops
> connections after a few seconds, then Postfix wi
> Per the welcome message you received when you joined the list:
>
That would be like 5+ years ago. I've slept since then.
> TO REPORT A PROBLEM see:
> http://www.postfix.org/DEBUG_README.html#mail
>
> At a minimum, postfix version, output of postconf -n and unedited
> NON-verbose logs exhibit
Gary Smith:
> I've been getting a lost of "lost connection after DATA" this last
> week. On our low volume servers (that houses some minor clients)
> we are receiving 800/day. We switched over to ipvsadm about 3
> weeks ago and I though maybe it's because of non-persistent
> connections. So I re
On 2010-05-13 9:59 PM, Gary Smith wrote:
> Anyway, we are still receiving them. The firewall allows port 25
> incoming, everything outgoing but there is also some nat'ing going on
> because of the ipvsadm. Anyone ever seen this type of issue with
> this type of config?
Per the welcome message yo
18 matches
Mail list logo
