the only other thing I did was, add mail.marlborosurvey.net to the Domain. Guess that would make sense though since it would go through right, but then wouldn't I be back to my same problem of not being able to send mail as root_at_domain.net instead of as root_at_hostname.domain.net?
From: msk_at_cloudmark.com
To: opendkim-users_at_lists.opendkim.org
Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2010 15:30:34 -0700
Subject: RE: Signing problem
Ah, you changed something else. The signature that was added
has a new “d=” value, namely “mail.marlborosurvey.net”. You don’t have a
public key posted for that domain, resulting in the temp-fail.
From:
opendkim-users-bounce_at_lists.opendkim.org
[mailto:opendkim-users-bounce_at_lists.opendkim.org] On Behalf Of Jason
Clint
Sent: Tuesday, October 26, 2010 3:21 PM
To: tlyons_at_ivenue.com
Cc: opendkim-users_at_lists.opendkim.org
Subject: RE: Signing problem
apparently sendmail is starting to get sick
of me:
Oct 26 16:16:03 mail sendmail[6668]: o9QMG3VX006668: from=root, size=26,
class=0, nrcpts=1,
msgid=<201010262216.o9QMG3VX006668_at_mail.marlborosurvey.net>, relay=root_at_localhost
Oct 26 16:16:03 mail sendmail[6669]: o9QMG3SJ006669:
from=<root_at_mail.marlborosurvey.net>, size=332, class=0, nrcpts=1,
msgid=<201010262216.o9QMG3VX006668_at_mail.marlborosurvey.net>, proto=ESMTP,
daemon=MTA, relay=localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]
Oct 26 16:16:03 mail sendmail[6669]: o9QMG3SJ006669: Milter insert (1): header:
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256;
c=relaxed/simple;\n\td=mail.marlborosurvey.net; s=mail;
t=1288131363;\n\tbh=frcCV1k9oG9oKj3dpUqdJg1PxRT2RSN/XKdLCPjaYaY=;\n\th=Date:From:Message-Id:To;\n\tz=Date:=20Tue,=2026=20Oct=202010=2016:16:03=20-0600|From:=20root=20\n\t
<root_at_mail.marlborosurvey.net>|Message-Id:=20<201010262216.o9QMG3V\n\t
X006668_at_mail.marlborosurvey.net>|To:=20sa-test_at_sendmail.net;\n\tb=DQ8aTRbSD2BwKTo8DQoqyrPbFs5xoDkQIodZmuJvfJ93GGUfANjXoTSGINdS14EGN\n\t
F4BeCntzj1A7GW1qeEWXIi2cbT6/I4L3AAzWkqkutS5hxm/76ljxZ4lX8bnK5ma6jz\n\t
t+V/MnxHKfbnU8quKhQHzjnxqHLTegIF30b40eEw=
Oct 26 16:16:03 mail sendmail[6668]: o9QMG3VX006668: to=sa-test_at_sendmail.net,
ctladdr=root (0/0), delay=00:00:00, xdelay=00:00:00, mailer=relay, pri=30026,
relay=[127.0.0.1] [127.0.0.1], dsn=2.0.0, stat=Sent (o9QMG3SJ006669 Message
accepted for delivery)
Oct 26 16:16:04 mail sendmail[6672]: STARTTLS=client, relay=smtp.sendmail.net.,
version=TLSv1/SSLv3, verify=FAIL, cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA, bits=256/256
Oct 26 16:16:05 mail sendmail[6672]: o9QMG3SJ006669:
to=<sa-test_at_sendmail.net>, ctladdr=<root_at_mail.marlborosurvey.net>
(0/0), delay=00:00:02, xdelay=00:00:02, mailer=esmtp, pri=120332,
relay=smtp.sendmail.net. [209.246.26.21], dsn=4.0.0,
stat=Deferred: 451 4.3.2 Please try again later
I will have to check on it in a minute!
From:
nosaj_17_at_hotmail.com
To: tlyons_at_ivenue.com
CC: opendkim-users_at_lists.opendkim.org
Subject: RE: Signing problem
Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2010 22:17:29 +0000
Just so you know its not whats in the log that bothers me but the response I
get back from sa-test_at_sendmail.net which is.......check that, I just looked
at the last log entry and saw this:
We hope this service has been helpful to you.
Authentication System: DomainKeys
Identified Mail
Result:
DKIM signature confirmed GOOD
Description:
Signature verified, message arrived intact
Reporting host:
sendmail.net
More information:
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/
Sendmail
milter:
https://sourceforge.net/projects/dkim-milter/
give me a second while I verify if its right and I didn't just doze off and
dream it started working.
> Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2010 15:11:27 -0700
> Subject: Re: Signing problem
> From: tlyons_at_ivenue.com
> To: nosaj_17_at_hotmail.com
> CC: opendkim-users_at_lists.opendkim.org
>
> On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 2:24 PM, Jason Clint <nosaj_17_at_hotmail.com>
wrote:
> > Another update, setting the Domain to
> > marlborosurvey.net,mail.marlborosurvey.net gets rid of the other
errro:
> > Oct 26 15:07:44 mail opendkim[6446]: o9QL7iJ8006451: no signing
domain match
> > for `mail.marlborosurvey.net'
>
> I just wanted to point out that what you are seeing is not an
"error",
> it's debug output caused by the "LogWhy" statement being enabled
in
> your opendkim configuration.
>
> Murray, maybe a log identifier to indicate it's debug output and not
> an error would be beneficial. I'm torn though...
>
> --
> Regards... Todd
> I seek the truth...it is only persistence in self-delusion and
> ignorance that does harm. -- Marcus Aurealius
>
>
Received on Tue Oct 26 2010 - 22:35:49 PST