false Host Down

Keith Larson

unread,

Jan 28, 2004, 8:18:15 PM1/28/04

to

I have a client where GWIA reports host down sending to my server. My server reports a host down sending to them, but both can send and receive email from other domains. Both servers are GW 6.5. One is running on NW 6.5 and the other is NW6.

Any suggestions?

Jim Michael

unread,

Jan 29, 2004, 10:57:39 AM1/29/04

to

I would use tel.nlm (telnet) to see if you can manually telnet to port 25 on
their server.

--
Jim
NSC SYsop

Keith Larson

unread,

Jan 29, 2004, 11:55:24 AM1/29/04

to

where would I find that?

>>> Jim Michael<jkmi...@myrealbox.com> 1/29/2004 10:57:39 AM >>>

iNcogNito

unread,

Jan 29, 2004, 2:08:49 PM1/29/04

to

http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=tel%2Enlm

--
He Wakes up at night screaming "Take out Pedro! Take out Pedro!" Ha Ha!

Keith Larson

unread,

Jan 29, 2004, 3:57:50 PM1/29/04

to

I didn't realize that NetWare 6.5 includes telnet.nlm now. I tried that and these two servers cannot connect on port 25, but can connect to other email servers on port 25. They are listening correctly, but not between each other.

It would seem that there is some sort of filter in place, but how could it block some but not others.

I can send email (and telnet on port 25) from at least three different clients to each of these servers, but they can't communicate with each other.

>>> iNcogNito<no...@nowhere.com> 1/29/2004 2:08:49 PM >>>

Jim Michael

unread,

Jan 30, 2004, 11:23:43 AM1/30/04

to

My guess is that there is some external filtering happening between you and
the remote site. You could try a tracert to see if you can even get to their
network, and if not where the communications are stopping.
--
Jim
NSC SYsop

Keith Larson

unread,

Jan 30, 2004, 1:58:54 PM1/30/04

to

I think that I got it now. sorry, but it was self-inflicted. I didn't realize this because the client on the other end said that it had happened before (and the vpn was only a day or so old)

I had setup a site to site VPN, but didn't have all of the routes configured yet. Once I unloaded the vpn nlm's on my side, I could communicate with them. Once I unloaded on their end, they could communicate with me.

Ideally, I want the vpn to be active. Is there a way to make that work and have gwia still use the "normal" route instead of the vpn or will it just work when I have all of my routes defined correctly.

>>> Jim Michael<jkmi...@myrealbox.com> 1/30/2004 11:23:43 AM >>>

Jim Michael

unread,

Jan 30, 2004, 2:39:50 PM1/30/04

to

You should be able to use route.cfg files in wpgate\gwia on each site to
specify the private IP address of the GWIA for each domain (on one each
side), thus when your GWIA looks up the remote side of the VPN it will get
the private IP address of their GWIA, and vice-versa.

--
Jim
NSC SYsop

Keith Larson

unread,

Jan 30, 2004, 2:43:11 PM1/30/04

to

please help me understand the purpose of route.cfg then. it tells gwia to NOT use DNS to resolve that domain name, but to use the ipaddress that is supplied instead?

>>> Jim Michael<jkmi...@myrealbox.com> 1/30/2004 2:39:50 PM >>>

Jim Michael

unread,

Jan 30, 2004, 6:21:42 PM1/30/04

to

sort of... gwia will look in route.cfg first when resolving an MX record for
a domain. In some cases (like when GWIA is behind NAT), without route.cfg it
looks up the MX for a domain it wants to send to (eg itself, for status
messages, etc) and finds the public address, which it cant' contact from
behind NAT. route.cfg lets it resolve to the private address.
--
Jim
NSC SYsop

Keith Larson

unread,

Jan 31, 2004, 9:06:12 AM1/31/04

to

so it should have the real internet domain and the private address. the internal dns domain would resolve to the private ip anyway, so that isn't any need for that, right?

>>> Jim Michael<jkmi...@myrealbox.com> 1/30/2004 6:21:42 PM >>>

Jim Michael

unread,

Jan 31, 2004, 11:02:03 AM1/31/04

to

>so it should have the real internet domain and the private address.

yes

> the internal dns domain would resolve to the private ip anyway, so that isn't
>any need for that, right?

Not necessarily. Most sites that run an internal DNS do not host their *MX*
records there. It is these lookups that the GWIA performs and finds the
*public* address of a remote host, because it queries a public DNS for them
(either directly, or indirectly via your internal DNS forwarding the
request.)

--
Jim
NSC SYsop

Keith Larson

unread,

Jan 31, 2004, 12:33:50 PM1/31/04

to

so would it make sense to include the real dns / private ip and the private dns/private ip ?

>>> Jim Michael<jkmi...@myrealbox.com> 1/31/2004 11:02:03 AM >>>