From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Feb 24 10:49:20 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 57CB1552 for ; Tue, 24 Feb 2015 10:49:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ne6-sys-email.precidata.net (ne-6.precidata.com [157.26.74.6]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B9BFDB6 for ; Tue, 24 Feb 2015 10:49:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ne6-sys-proxy.precidata.net (ne6-sys-proxy.precidata.net [127.1.0.13]); by ne6-sys-email.precidata.net (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTP id 39e34b15; Tue, 24 Feb 2015 11:42:33 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <54EC5598.9030805@precidata.com> Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2015 11:42:32 +0100 From: Cedric Berger User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.10; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: misc@opensmtpd.org, freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: opensmtpd 5.4.4 in freebsd 9 jail Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2015 10:49:20 -0000 Hello, Since I upgraded my freebsd 9 jail with the latest opensmtpd 5.4.4_1,1 port, smtp-out refuse to send any email to the outside world. I've seen a similar issue reported by "Meutel" here, but with no apparent solution: http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.mail.opensmtpd.general/day=20150211, 2nd post. Based on ktrace analysis, I believe the faulty code starts at line 210 of getaddrinfo_async.c in libasr: https://github.com/OpenSMTPD/libasr/blob/libasr-1.0.1/src/getaddrinfo_async.c This code returns EAI_NONAME if there is no non-loopback interface configured in the jail. This is my case, as a jail by default has only loopback interfaces configured (this doesn't prevent connecting to the outside world). If my analysis is correct, I believe that if no non-loopback interface is found, the code should also (in a second step) consider loopback interfaces when selecting IPv4 versus IPv6, instead of just bailing out. That would make the code more robust. Thanks, Cedric -- Cedric Berger Precidata Sarl Maladière 71c 2000 Neuchâtel cedric@precidata.com 032 930 29 62 079 934 11 02