It's baaaack....
Patty Winter
server" error message from Eudora (6.2.4) when I send queued
messages. I went into Terminal and redid the command to add a
certain IP address to the Mac OS X firewall list of blocked
addresses, even though I did that months ago. I didn't get the
error the rest of yesterday, but it's back today.
I suspect that, for whatever reason, Eudora is now trying to
connect to a *different* server than previously. How can I
find out the address of the server it's trying to reach so
that I can add that to the blocked list? There is no IP
address in the error message. And what command do I use to
view the list of blocked addresses for ipfw?
Thanks!
Patty
Kathy Morgan
> I suspect that, for whatever reason, Eudora is now trying to
> connect to a *different* server than previously. How can I
> find out the address of the server it's trying to reach so
> that I can add that to the blocked list? There is no IP
> address in the error message.
<waving> Hi!
Does it give a server name? If so, you can go to whois.com, enter the
domain name (e.g., sonic.net) and get IP information for that domain.
There are (at least) two other possibilities, besides a firewall block,
that could explain the error message. It may be that the server was
down temporarily and hence not responding--not much you can do about
that other than contact support by phone, since the outgoing mail isn't
working.
The other is that the server is really slow to respond and Eudora is
timing it out before it can answer. That you can fix by increasing the
time limit. You have to have the Esoteric Settings enabled, then go to
the "Timeouts" panel and increase the number for Response from Server.
I've got mine set for 225, which I think means 225 seconds, because
sometimes my server is really, really slow to respond.
>And what command do I use to
> view the list of blocked addresses for ipfw?
That I have no idea. :-( If you don't get an answer from someone else
here, try asking in comp.sys.mac.comm - there are some really
knowledgeable, helpful people there.
--
Kathy
Patty Winter
In article <1j8ayzu.1s4jdgqx1v4pzN%kmo...@spamcop.net>,
Kathy Morgan <kmo...@spamcop.net> wrote:
>
><waving> Hi!
:-) Hi, stranger!
>Does it give a server name? If so, you can go to whois.com, enter the
>domain name (e.g., sonic.net) and get IP information for that domain.
Nope, no server information at all. Just the generic message.
>There are (at least) two other possibilities, besides a firewall block,
>that could explain the error message. It may be that the server was
>down temporarily and hence not responding--not much you can do about
>that other than contact support by phone, since the outgoing mail isn't
>working.
Oh, sorry, I wasn't clear about that. Outgoing mail is working fine.
This message is in *addition* to the SMTP progress window. That's
why I'm assuming it's the darned Qualcomm ad-server problem again.
It isn't anything at my ISP.
Patty
Kathy Morgan
> Oh, sorry, I wasn't clear about that. Outgoing mail is working fine.
> This message is in *addition* to the SMTP progress window. That's
> why I'm assuming it's the darned Qualcomm ad-server problem again.
> It isn't anything at my ISP.
Oh! Um, do you have logging turned on? If you are logging all actions,
maybe the log will have something that would help.
--
Kathy
Patty Winter
In article <1j8bein.bq86rr71z5ohN%kmo...@spamcop.net>,
Kathy Morgan <kmo...@spamcop.net> wrote:
>
>Oh! Um, do you have logging turned on? If you are logging all actions,
>maybe the log will have something that would help.
I turned on all the logging options that weren't already on, and
managed to capture this:
262144:3.58.49 DNS Lookup of "adserver.eudora.com"
262144:3.58.50 192.190.109.20 (1)
262144:3.58.50 Connecting to 192.190.109.20:80
262144:3.58.51 Connection to 192.190.109.20:80 failed. Error -3212
So I think it's the same old problem. But I also found out how
to view my ipfw settings (%sudo ipfw list), and the rule I had
put to stop contacts to the Eudora adserver is still there:
00099 deny ip from any to 192.190.109.20
So I can't figure out why Eudora is still trying to connect. Oh,
wait...okay, I just quit and relaunched Eudora, and I didn't get
the error message this time. Maybe my re-entry of the firewall
rule hadn't taken effect because I hadn't rebooted Eudora. Although
that still doesn't explain how the firewall rule that I put in
months ago got deactivated in the first place. Well, we'll see
whether it lasts this time.
Oh, and I learned (from the archives of another Eudora discussion
group) that one can open the Eudora log with Eudora's "Open" command,
then keep it open and watch it as Eudora updates it. Very handy.
BTW, in the following log entry:
262144:1.37.30 ESMTP has NFI what "a.mail.sonic.net" is supposed to mean
does "NFI" mean what I think it means? :-)
Patty
John H Meyers
> 262144:3.58.50 Connecting to 192.190.109.20:80
Here's an article (and thread) about the Eudora servers:
http://eudorabb.qualcomm.com/showpost.php?p=38825
http://eudorabb.qualcomm.com/showthread.php?t=13569
> I can't figure out why Eudora is still trying to connect.
There were still ads, as of the last releases of Classic Eudora.
I believe that connection is still attempted,
even with "Paid" registration,
although the "final" versions are not supposed to care
whether or not they ever connect.
But hardly anyone ever reports "No response from [this] server,"
so why doesn't this bother everyone?
> does "***" mean what I think it means? :-)
Eudora says it quite a lot,
and no one seems to know where she picked up this language :)
---
More Canadian TV (comedy, very popular in Iowa USA):
http://www.redgreen.com/
And the movie:
http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00008R9KR
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0286915/
--
Patty Winter
In article <op.u2lby...@miu.edu>,
John H Meyers <jhme...@nomail.invalid> wrote:
>On Thu, 29 Oct 2009 20:36:08 -0500, Patty Winter wrote:
>
>> 262144:3.58.50 Connecting to 192.190.109.20:80
>
>Here's an article (and thread) about the Eudora servers:
>
>http://eudorabb.qualcomm.com/showpost.php?p=38825
>http://eudorabb.qualcomm.com/showthread.php?t=13569
Yep, that's a discussion of the same adserver.
>> I can't figure out why Eudora is still trying to connect.
>
>There were still ads, as of the last releases of Classic Eudora.
>
>I believe that connection is still attempted,
>even with "Paid" registration,
Right, but I mean, I don't understand why Eudora is still
trying to connect given that I have that address blocked
in the firewall. I went for many months not getting that
error message.
>> does "***" mean what I think it means? :-)
>
>Eudora says it quite a lot,
>and no one seems to know where she picked up this language :)
:-)
And lest anyone think that I posted naughty words that had
to be bleeped, I quoted the exact message in Eudora's log,
which merely had an abbreviation. :-)
Patty
Sander Tekelenburg
Patty Winter <pat...@wintertime.com> wrote:
[...]
> I don't understand why Eudora is still
> trying to connect given that I have that address blocked
> in the firewall.
A firewall blocking a connection is just that: it denies that type of
connection. That doesn't mean Eudora won't try. Just that it won't
succeed.
> I went for many months not getting that
> error message.
I imagine that was due to something else than your ipfw rule. No idea
what, though...
--
Sander Tekelenburg, <http://www.euronet.nl/~tekelenb/>
Mac user: "Macs only have 40 viruses, tops!"
PC user: "SEE! Not even the virus writers support Macs!"
Patty Winter
In article <user-2F345F.0...@newsreader.euronet.nl>,
Sander Tekelenburg <teke...@euronet.nl> wrote:
>In article <4aea78a9$0$1648$742e...@news.sonic.net>,
> Patty Winter <pat...@wintertime.com> wrote:
>
>> I don't understand why Eudora is still
>> trying to connect given that I have that address blocked
>> in the firewall.
>
>A firewall blocking a connection is just that: it denies that type of
>connection. That doesn't mean Eudora won't try. Just that it won't
>succeed.
Okay, that makes sense. But then how come the problem went away
after I first installed the firewall rule?
>> I went for many months not getting that
>> error message.
>
>I imagine that was due to something else than your ipfw rule. No idea
>what, though...
I don't see what else it could be. It was the fix suggested by
folks on a bunch of Eudora discussion sites, and it worked for
other people as well as me.
Patty
Sander Tekelenburg
Patty Winter <pat...@wintertime.com> wrote:
> In article <user-2F345F.0...@newsreader.euronet.nl>,
> Sander Tekelenburg <teke...@euronet.nl> wrote:
[...]
> >A firewall blocking a connection is just that: it denies that type of
> >connection. That doesn't mean Eudora won't try. Just that it won't
> >succeed.
>
> Okay, that makes sense. But then how come the problem went away
> after I first installed the firewall rule?
Shere coincidence is always a possibility. As I remember it, Eudora
fetches a bunch of ads in one go and shows those for ' a while'. Only
after that while does it try to fetch new ads. I don't know how long
this 'while' is, but I seem to remember that it was weeks or even months.
In the ad-based Eudora that I've used on one machine for about a year, I
don't recall ever having seen it show any ads or indicate that it tried
to fetch them, or have it throw up error messages for not being able to
fetch ads.