A very cognizant answer..Thanks
Problem is that the Ironport was setup to accept inbound email for the
associated domain and then relay spam free mail to the actual internal
e-mail server.
What the install person did not do was to make sure that outbound e-mail
used the same reverse path.
Outbound email goes to the sites def gtwy, which in this case is the PIX
550. Thus the route map question?
Since Exchange 2007 is in use, either a def gtwy or a smart email host is
allowed on the outbound trip.
Using the internal address of the Ironport did not allow email egression.
Customer is contacting Ironport
about the required steps needed to allow both inbound and outbound email to
pass through their device.
It would be nice to clean the outbound email.
This is the kind of shoddy workmanship that keeps me busy...Sell, sell, sell
and do a Mickey mouse install....
"Scott Perry" <scott.perry@somecompany> wrote in message
news:48b2ff4b$0$3717$.. .
> Houston SBC,
>
> I believe that the answer you seek is, "The PIX cannot do route-maps."
>
> This has nothing to do with the version of the PIX image.
> Although the PIX does perform routing, it just is not as sophisticated as
> the actual routers in some regards.
>
> Does the Ironport device act as an incoming and outgoing SMTP server or
> does it intercept outgoing SMTP traffic? I thought that inside hosts were
> configured to use the Ironport device as a SMTP server for outgoing
> messages and that DNS was configured to have inbound e-mail go to the
> Ironport device. In that situation, the Ironport device would forward the
> received inbound e-mail to the actual internal e-mail server after
> Ironport device processing. So, if this is the case, the inside hosts or
> servers need to be configured to use the Ironport device for outbound
> message delivery and the policy based routing or route map is not needed.
>
> -----
> Scott Perry
> Indianapolis, IN
> -----
>
> "Walter Roberson" <> wrote in message
> news:8RBsk.37012$hx.5365@pd7urf3no...
>> In article <>,
>> Lutz Donnerhacke <> wrote:
>>
>>>PIX is not a router, but a NAT device. So you can't use route-maps for
>>>other
>>>issues than OSFP and RIP.
>>
>> OSPF and RIP and other routing protocols do not define a router.
>> A router is any device that connects multiple layer 2 networks
>> at layer 3, and every PIX model since the beginning has been
>> able to do that. Therefore a PIX *is* a router. It just isn't very
>> flexible in how it makes its routing decisions, and it violates
>> the RFCs by not decrementing the TTL... but adherence to RFCs does
>> not define whether it is a router or not.
>
>
|