Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Would your SMTP server accept -> ehlo MAPI1.0 ???
124 views
Skip to first unread message
Mail Man
Oct 12, 2012, 7:53:29 PM10/12/12
to
Recently I've been trying to figure out why a Trendnet TV-IP110w
IP-camera was not able to connect to my SMTP server to send mail.
I performed some packet analysis and found that the camera was greeting
the server with this:
ehlo MAPI1.0
And my server responds with this:
501 Invalid domain syntax
In looking at the ehlo specifications, the greeting is supposed to
contain something that looks like a domain-name. So I believe the
string "MAPI1.0" is being rejected by my server on that basis.
When I redirect the camera to use my ISP's out-bound MTA server, it
apparently accepts the ehlo and the email is delivered correctly. In
doing so, I see this in the header generated by the camera:
X-Status: Alpha
X-Mailer: Fitivision Mail API V1.0
I've updated the camera's firmware, but it doesn't change the ehlo
string.
The firmware file is in the format .pck and seems to require unpacking
and re-engineering on a linux machine (which I'm unfamiliar with). My
intention would have been to replace the MAPI1.0 string with something
more acceptible to my server.
In posting this, I just wanted to document this issue (I have seen
others mention SMTP problems with this camera in other forums) and I
wanted to know why the firmware programmers would have used this string
for their ehlo greeting - and would it be compatible with some (or many,
or most) SMTP servers in current operation.
IP-camera was not able to connect to my SMTP server to send mail.
I performed some packet analysis and found that the camera was greeting
the server with this:
ehlo MAPI1.0
And my server responds with this:
501 Invalid domain syntax
In looking at the ehlo specifications, the greeting is supposed to
contain something that looks like a domain-name. So I believe the
string "MAPI1.0" is being rejected by my server on that basis.
When I redirect the camera to use my ISP's out-bound MTA server, it
apparently accepts the ehlo and the email is delivered correctly. In
doing so, I see this in the header generated by the camera:
X-Status: Alpha
X-Mailer: Fitivision Mail API V1.0
I've updated the camera's firmware, but it doesn't change the ehlo
string.
The firmware file is in the format .pck and seems to require unpacking
and re-engineering on a linux machine (which I'm unfamiliar with). My
intention would have been to replace the MAPI1.0 string with something
more acceptible to my server.
In posting this, I just wanted to document this issue (I have seen
others mention SMTP problems with this camera in other forums) and I
wanted to know why the firmware programmers would have used this string
for their ehlo greeting - and would it be compatible with some (or many,
or most) SMTP servers in current operation.
Solbu
Oct 26, 2012, 9:31:41 PM10/26/12
to
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Mail Man sent the following transmission through subspace:
> I wanted to know why the firmware programmers would have used this string
> for their ehlo greeting
They use it because more and more SMTP servers require a HELO/EHLO
greeting before they accept any email. The spammers do the same.
Their SMTP relay bots also use HELO/EHLO, and they usually use whatever
hostname the infected computer uses.
> would it be compatible with some (or many,
> or most) SMTP servers in current operation.
Any HELO/EHLO string is accepted by any SMTP server. But many servers
are also configured to require the string to resolve to a domain name.
So the server doesn't care what the string is, as long as it resolves
to an A, AAAA or MX record. ISPs oftens have their own network as an
exception to the requirement, so their users can send email.
- --
Solbu - http://www.solbu.net
Remove '.ugyldig' for email
PGP key ID: 0xFA687324
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFQizl9T1rWTfpocyQRAoz5AJ0ZXGPUYcYF5HViiYyjF6nYX43HOwCg/gpG
hQbSHkyPf8JPQbaWPeNppok=
=UzYD
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Hash: SHA1
Mail Man sent the following transmission through subspace:
> I wanted to know why the firmware programmers would have used this string
> for their ehlo greeting
greeting before they accept any email. The spammers do the same.
Their SMTP relay bots also use HELO/EHLO, and they usually use whatever
hostname the infected computer uses.
> would it be compatible with some (or many,
> or most) SMTP servers in current operation.
are also configured to require the string to resolve to a domain name.
So the server doesn't care what the string is, as long as it resolves
to an A, AAAA or MX record. ISPs oftens have their own network as an
exception to the requirement, so their users can send email.
- --
Solbu - http://www.solbu.net
Remove '.ugyldig' for email
PGP key ID: 0xFA687324
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFQizl9T1rWTfpocyQRAoz5AJ0ZXGPUYcYF5HViiYyjF6nYX43HOwCg/gpG
hQbSHkyPf8JPQbaWPeNppok=
=UzYD
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Jorgen Grahn
Oct 27, 2012, 2:06:19 PM10/27/12
to
["Followup-To:" header set to comp.mail.misc.]
On Sat, 2012-10-27, Solbu wrote:
>
> Mail Man sent the following transmission through subspace:
>
>> I wanted to know why the firmware programmers would have used this string
>> for their ehlo greeting
>
> They use it because more and more SMTP servers require a HELO/EHLO
> greeting before they accept any email.
Huh? HELO has been mandatory with SMTP since the 1980s. There may be
servers which are "permissive in what they accept" and continue
without it, but if you're writing a client, why take the chance?
/Jorgen
--
// Jorgen Grahn <grahn@ Oo o. . .
\X/ snipabacken.se> O o .
On Sat, 2012-10-27, Solbu wrote:
>
> Mail Man sent the following transmission through subspace:
>
>> I wanted to know why the firmware programmers would have used this string
>> for their ehlo greeting
>
> They use it because more and more SMTP servers require a HELO/EHLO
> greeting before they accept any email.
servers which are "permissive in what they accept" and continue
without it, but if you're writing a client, why take the chance?
/Jorgen
--
// Jorgen Grahn <grahn@ Oo o. . .
\X/ snipabacken.se> O o .
Mail Man
Oct 27, 2012, 8:14:38 PM10/27/12
to
Jorgen Grahn wrote:
> On Sat, 2012-10-27, Solbu wrote:
> >> I wanted to know why the firmware programmers would have used
> >> this string for their ehlo greeting
> >
> > They use it because more and more SMTP servers require a
> > HELO/EHLO greeting before they accept any email.
>
> Huh? HELO has been mandatory with SMTP since the 1980s.
You both missed the entire point of my original question.
> On Sat, 2012-10-27, Solbu wrote:
> >> I wanted to know why the firmware programmers would have used
> >> this string for their ehlo greeting
> >
> > They use it because more and more SMTP servers require a
> > HELO/EHLO greeting before they accept any email.
>
> Huh? HELO has been mandatory with SMTP since the 1980s.
So I will repeat it.
===========
Recently I've been trying to figure out why a Trendnet TV-IP110w
IP-camera was not able to connect to my SMTP server to send mail.
I performed some packet analysis and found that the camera was greeting
the server with this:
ehlo MAPI1.0
And my server responds with this:
501 Invalid domain syntax
In looking at the ehlo specifications, the greeting is supposed to
contain something that looks like a domain-name. So I believe the
string "MAPI1.0" is being rejected by my server on that basis.
============
IP-camera was not able to connect to my SMTP server to send mail.
I performed some packet analysis and found that the camera was greeting
the server with this:
ehlo MAPI1.0
And my server responds with this:
501 Invalid domain syntax
In looking at the ehlo specifications, the greeting is supposed to
contain something that looks like a domain-name. So I believe the
string "MAPI1.0" is being rejected by my server on that basis.
So you see, it's not that this camera wasn't generating a "ehlo"
greeting.
The issue is the "MAPI1.0" part of the ehlo greeting that my SMTP server
apparently doesn't like, and it doesn't seem to like it because
according to SMTP standards "MAPI1.0" is not a valid domain-name.
Comments?
Fritz Wuehler
Oct 28, 2012, 9:07:43 AM10/28/12
to
Mail Man
Oct 28, 2012, 12:35:27 PM10/28/12
to
Fritz Wuehler wrote:
> > The issue is the "MAPI1.0" part of the ehlo greeting that my SMTP
> > server apparently doesn't like, and it doesn't seem to like it
> > because according to SMTP standards "MAPI1.0" is not a valid
> > domain-name.
> >
> > Comments?
>
> Yes, you're a lamer.
What's your fucking problem?
> > The issue is the "MAPI1.0" part of the ehlo greeting that my SMTP
> > server apparently doesn't like, and it doesn't seem to like it
> > because according to SMTP standards "MAPI1.0" is not a valid
> > domain-name.
> >
> > Comments?
>
> Yes, you're a lamer.
If this is all over your head, then don't be an ass and try to respond
to it.
Apparently nobody else here can respond coherently about this.
Anonymous
Oct 28, 2012, 4:49:28 PM10/28/12
to
Mail Man <Ma...@Man.com> wrote:
> Fritz Wuehler wrote:
>
> > > The issue is the "MAPI1.0" part of the ehlo greeting that my SMTP
> > > server apparently doesn't like, and it doesn't seem to like it
> > > because according to SMTP standards "MAPI1.0" is not a valid
> > > domain-name.
> > >
> > > Comments?
> >
> > Yes, you're a lamer.
>
> What's your fucking problem?
Your problem is you're a lamer, an idiot, and a stupid sonofabitch. You
> Fritz Wuehler wrote:
>
> > > The issue is the "MAPI1.0" part of the ehlo greeting that my SMTP
> > > server apparently doesn't like, and it doesn't seem to like it
> > > because according to SMTP standards "MAPI1.0" is not a valid
> > > domain-name.
> > >
> > > Comments?
> >
> > Yes, you're a lamer.
>
> What's your fucking problem?
can't figure out obvious stuff and you constantly make lame comments on this
newsgroup. Maybe you ought to encrypt your fictitious domain name and then
it will work. Does MAPI1.0 look like a valid domain name to you, lamer?
>
> If this is all over your head, then don't be an ass and try to respond
> to it.
You need a long beating with a big fucking cluestick! Come out behind the
> If this is all over your head, then don't be an ass and try to respond
> to it.
barn and we'll see what we can do for ya, lamer!
>
> Apparently nobody else here can respond coherently about this.
here knows what the answer is but I am the only one with a minute free to
kick your teeth in, lamer!
POW!! BOP!! BIFF!! BAM!!
Barry Margolin
Oct 28, 2012, 10:17:15 PM10/28/12
to
In article <5078AD79...@Man.com>, Mail Man <Ma...@Man.com> wrote:
> Recently I've been trying to figure out why a Trendnet TV-IP110w
> IP-camera was not able to connect to my SMTP server to send mail.
>
> I performed some packet analysis and found that the camera was greeting
> the server with this:
>
> ehlo MAPI1.0
>
> And my server responds with this:
>
> 501 Invalid domain syntax
>
> In looking at the ehlo specifications, the greeting is supposed to
> contain something that looks like a domain-name. So I believe the
> string "MAPI1.0" is being rejected by my server on that basis.
>
> When I redirect the camera to use my ISP's out-bound MTA server, it
> apparently accepts the ehlo and the email is delivered correctly. In
> doing so, I see this in the header generated by the camera:
>
> X-Status: Alpha
> X-Mailer: Fitivision Mail API V1.0
>
> I've updated the camera's firmware, but it doesn't change the ehlo
> string.
Most mail clients often don't have a domain of their own to put in the
> Recently I've been trying to figure out why a Trendnet TV-IP110w
> IP-camera was not able to connect to my SMTP server to send mail.
>
> I performed some packet analysis and found that the camera was greeting
> the server with this:
>
> ehlo MAPI1.0
>
> And my server responds with this:
>
> 501 Invalid domain syntax
>
> In looking at the ehlo specifications, the greeting is supposed to
> contain something that looks like a domain-name. So I believe the
> string "MAPI1.0" is being rejected by my server on that basis.
>
> When I redirect the camera to use my ISP's out-bound MTA server, it
> apparently accepts the ehlo and the email is delivered correctly. In
> doing so, I see this in the header generated by the camera:
>
> X-Status: Alpha
> X-Mailer: Fitivision Mail API V1.0
>
> I've updated the camera's firmware, but it doesn't change the ehlo
> string.
EHLO message. That part of the protocol was designed with the
expectation that SMTP connections would all be between MTAs. It wasn't
until many years later that PCs started running mail clients that used
SMTP to submit mail through a relay.
I checked what Mac Mail does, it sends
EHLO [192.168.3.99]
i.e. the machine's local IP. As you can see, the value of this string is
nonexistent when the connection is between a mail client and its message
submission server.
Why do you have your SMTP server configured to check this for local
clients? It's reasonable to check it for incoming mail from other MTAs,
as an anti-spam measure, but what are you gaining when you check it on
authenticated clients?
--
Barry Margolin
Arlington, MA
Jorgen Grahn
Oct 29, 2012, 6:08:36 PM10/29/12
to
[Followup set -- again.]
On Sun, 2012-10-28, Mail Man wrote:
> Jorgen Grahn wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 2012-10-27, Solbu wrote:
>
>> >> I wanted to know why the firmware programmers would have used
>> >> this string for their ehlo greeting
>> >
>> > They use it because more and more SMTP servers require a
>> > HELO/EHLO greeting before they accept any email.
>>
>> Huh? HELO has been mandatory with SMTP since the 1980s.
>
> You both missed the entire point of my original question.
No I didn't. I *ignored* your question, and commented on what Solbu
wrote.
On Sun, 2012-10-28, Mail Man wrote:
> Jorgen Grahn wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 2012-10-27, Solbu wrote:
>
>> >> I wanted to know why the firmware programmers would have used
>> >> this string for their ehlo greeting
>> >
>> > They use it because more and more SMTP servers require a
>> > HELO/EHLO greeting before they accept any email.
>>
>> Huh? HELO has been mandatory with SMTP since the 1980s.
>
> You both missed the entire point of my original question.
wrote.
0 new messages