I find dma(8) quite convenient, so I'm using it also on other operating systems.
By casually observing the system log on a debian machine, I've noticed that something (I think it's cron) is desperately trying to send some email:
As I understand from the documentation, LOGIN should be the default, and STARTTLS is enabled only if the option of the same name is specified in the configuration file. Is my interpretation correct?
For the record, this problem only happens on debian: my freebsd machines work as normal. Yet it doesn't look like the debian package is patching it to behave differently.
Any idea on what is going on?
By casually observing the system log on a debian machine, I've noticed that something (I think it's cron) is desperately trying to send some email:
Dec 17 14:30:03 <hostname> dma[195472]: Server greeting successfully completed
Dec 17 14:30:03 <hostname> dma[195471]: Server does not support STARTTLS
Dec 17 14:30:03 <hostname> dma[195472]: Server does not support STARTTLS
Dec 17 14:30:03 <hostname> dma[195471]: Server supports LOGIN authentication
Dec 17 14:30:03 <hostname> dma[195472]: Server supports LOGIN authentication
Dec 17 14:30:03 <hostname> dma[195471]: using SMTP authentication for user <abridged>@fastmail.com
Dec 17 14:30:03 <hostname> dma[195472]: using SMTP authentication for user <abridged>@fastmail.com
Dec 17 14:30:05 <hostname> dma[195472]: remote delivery to smtp.fastmail.com [103.168.172.60] failed after final DATA: 551 5.7.1 Not authorised to send from this header address
Dec 17 14:30:05 <hostname> dma[195471]: remote delivery to smtp.fastmail.com [103.168.172.60] failed after final DATA: 551 5.7.1 Not authorised to send from this header address
Dec 17 14:30:05 <hostname> dma[195472]: can not bounce a bounce message, discarding
Dec 17 14:30:05 <hostname> dma[195471]: can not bounce a bounce message, discarding
As I understand from the documentation, LOGIN should be the default, and STARTTLS is enabled only if the option of the same name is specified in the configuration file. Is my interpretation correct?
For the record, this problem only happens on debian: my freebsd machines work as normal. Yet it doesn't look like the debian package is patching it to behave differently.
Any idea on what is going on?