regards
Craig
--
How are you routing from the IIS SMTP installs to the main mailbox server
-- DNS MX or hard-coded Remote Domains?
If you're using DNS, have you ensured that the IIS boxes get the private
IP address of the mailbox server instead of trying to do a loopback NAT
through your firewall (which can often trip up such setups).
-- Sandy
------------------------------------
Sanford Whiteman, Chief Technologist
Broadleaf Systems, a division of
Cypress Integrated Systems, Inc.
------------------------------------
thanks
"Sanford Whiteman" <swhitemanlis...@cypressintegrated.com> wrote
in message news:op.u1as77vb6c17zw@gw02...
>> I checked our exchange config and nothing is blocking these IP
>> addresses(internal) DNS is good and I can telnet into exchange server
>> from any of these boxes and send mail.
>
> How are you routing from the IIS SMTP installs to the main mailbox
Exactly.
> I doubt if routing or NAT would effect this behavior.
Take IIS box at 192.168.1.3 and Exchange at 192.168.1.4.
Exchange NATed to public IP 1.2.3.4.
DNS MX RR for example.com points to exchange.example.com. DNS A RR for
exchange.example.com points to 1.2.3.4.
When 192.168.1.3 tries to send to us...@example.com, it will attempt to
connect to 1.2.3.4. Enterprise firewalls will not allow that transit.
It's in fact a common problem that calls for either split DNS (internal
copy of the zone that serves private IPs) or hard-coded mailroutes (Remote
Domains in IIS SMTP).
-- Sandy
"Sanford Whiteman" <swhitemanlis...@cypressintegrated.com> wrote
in message news:op.u1a4hzaf6c17zw@gw02...
regards
"Sanford Whiteman" <swhitemanlis...@cypressintegrated.com> wrote
in message news:op.u1a4hzaf6c17zw@gw02...
Up to you if you want to use it, but there's no reason to believe there is
a bug without proof. The setup you describe is eminently easy to do with
IIS SMTP and is likely in place in hundreds of thousands of developer
installations. I relay through XPSP3 IIS SMTP every day.
thanks for taking the time to reply !!
Carli
"Sanford Whiteman" <swhitemanlis...@cypressintegrated.com> wrote
in message news:op.u1d5e6146c17zw@gw02...
That's a very good reason to stop troubleshooting... but not justification
to claim there is a defect in the product. Sorry to be harsh, but I take
very seriously the concept that there's a bug in something so basic that
has been in continuous use for 6 years all over the Windows community.
The burden o' proof is on you to create a controlled, technically fluent
experiment before publishing stuff like that for the whole world.
-- Sandy