RES: [MASOCH-L] CNAME_lookup_failed_temporarily

Daniel Martinez daniel_martinez at
Tue Apr 19 15:48:52 BRT 2005

Não se preocupem, estarei patcheando meu qmail. Mas fica aqui minha
revolta de que e INnecessário ter 9 MX no DNS. :)

Link do patch por se alguém precisa:

Obrigado a todos.

E.2. Why can't I send mail to a large site with lots of MX's?
If you're getting:

deferral: CNAME_lookup_failed_temporarily._(#4.4.3)/

The problem might be that qmail can't handle large name server query
responses. The fix is to install a patch or workaround. See Patches
under Advanced Topics.

There's also a question as to why some people don't have trouble
reaching such systems. Basically, depending on the timing and ordering
of queries made to your local nameserver, the size of the response to an
ANY query for "" may be larger than the 512 byte limit of a UDP
packet, or it may not.

"May not" is likely to happen if the A and MX records time out, but the
NS records don't. Since the .COM servers set a 2 day TTL on those, but
AOL sets a 1 hour TTL on their records, this will often happen on less
busy nameservers. Busier nameservers are more likely to have those
records in their cache at any given time, frustrating an unpatched
qmail's attempts to check for CNAMEs.

A better test is to send mail to nosuchuser at; if it
clears your queue and winds up bouncing from, your MTA can
send mail to hosts with MX lists that exceed 512 bytes. (By using a
single RRset, with a single TTL, that exceeds 512 bytes, the problem can
be seen without depending on the timing and ordering of other queries.)

On Tue, 2005-04-19 at 15:36 -0300, Lao DanTong wrote:
> On Tue, 19 Apr 2005, Frederick F. wrote:
> > Se não me engano existe um patch para o qmail procurar TODOS os MX antes de
> > desistir de entregar o email.
> > Você tem que aplicar este patch :)
> desconfio que o problema não é com o qmail. enviei agora uma mensagem de 
> teste para o postmaster at através de qmail e foi igual faca 
> quente na manteiga.
> qual é o servidor de nomes usado? o problema pode estar aí.
> __
> masoch-l list

More information about the masoch-l mailing list