|
||||||||
Jeff, In message <4523CF99 dot 1050406 at buehlertech dot com>, Jeff Buehler <jeff at buehlertech dot com> writes >I think Neil is just saying it may be worth exploring other possible >reasons for the email to be failing rather than focusing on the bad TCP >checksums, which may or may not be related (is that right, Neil?). It >seems to me that that woulds be a indication of part of the problem, >though, but it may confuse the issue. For example, are you certain >that the Postfix server doesn't have problems with large emails in >general? I was having an issue with a mail server that had memory >corruption due to memory timings in the bios that ONLY failed on very >large email transfers (over 1.5 meg) and it took me quite a while to >discover the cause, or even the problem, since none of my users >reported it for a very long time. > >If it were me, I would try sending large emails from other locations to >verify the server is functioning properly (just to discount that as a >possibility), then I would try sending large files from the M0n0 VPN >via FTP to see if the failure is specific to SMTP. I would suspect >memory on the M0n0, or the network card. I have found with M0n0wall >that using IPSEC changing the type of compression makes a difference >with MTU issues (PPTP doesn't have that option). Finally messing with >MTU settings is the only thing left, and I have had very significant >problems that were hard to correct with MTU (just changing this and >that didn't work - it required very deliberate changes on a number of >systems along with reboots in some cases) running M0n0wall to Windows >systems specifically. Yep. My point was that the bad checksums may just lead you down the wrong path and waste your time. To confirm whether this is a problem or is just TCP offloading, perform a packet capture using a separate machine, either in a tap, a spanned port on a manageable switch or a hub. At least that way you'll know if this really is a problem. HTH, Neil. >Andreas Ferrari wrote: >> > This is probably a red herring. >> Thanks for your answer.... >> >> Dou you think i will report something that i have dreamd? >> >> The fact is that it still not working, I tried lowering the mtu >>without sucess... >> So if you or someone have any ideas what there could be wrong please >>give me a hint. >> >> Neil A. Hillard schrieb: >>> Hi, >>> >>> I've been away for a while and haven't seen a response to this >>> but apologies if I've missed it. >>> >>> In message <451A397A dot 8010006 at stasoft dot ch>, Andreas Ferrari >>> <aferrari at stasoft dot ch> writes >>> >>>> One of our customer has a VPN from his home office (wrap+m0n0 ver 1.22) >>>> to his office (wrap+m0n0 ver 1.22), that works fine. When he tries to >>>> send a mail from home over the VPN to the postfix server then the mail >>>> is never delivered to the mailserver. >>>> I noticed that small plaintext messages can be delivered to the postfix >>>> server but if the mail gets bigger then only the first part of the data >>>> are sent. >>>> On the mailserver i started tcpdump and could see that the mail could >>>> not be sent because there are a lot of bad tcp cksum messages. >>>> So the mailserver gets the first part right and the rest of the data >>>> are bad. How could that happend? >>> >>> >>> This is probably a red herring. I suspect that you'll find that this is >>> due to TCP Checksum Offloading. I spent a couple of days chasing what I >>> thought were problems cause by this - turns out it was something else. >>> >>> HTH, >>> >>> >>> Neil. >>> >> >> > > >--------------------------------------------------------------------- >To unsubscribe, e-mail: m0n0wall dash unsubscribe at lists dot m0n0 dot ch >For additional commands, e-mail: m0n0wall dash help at lists dot m0n0 dot ch > -- Neil A. Hillard E-Mail: m0n0 at dana dot org dot uk |