Re: [Sheflug] sendmail & cannons

[Alex Hudson <xxxxx [at] xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, 2002-01-22 at 21:28, Chris J wrote:
> > One wonders why you would want to canonify those values... ?
> 
> Well the first thing that springs to mind is if SMART_HOST is a name, and 
> there's nowt in /etc/hosts for it, it'll fail to send the email :) Ditto for 
> LOCAL_RELAY I'd guess.

Turning on canonification (reversing a forward lookup, essentially) for
the purposes of allowing forward lookups is the most peverse reasoning
I've heard. I don't see why you need the canonical name for a relay -
unless SMART_HOST/LOCAL_RELAY are set to _domains_, and you're
interested in relaying via the mx hosts for the domain. Eeek!

> How I configured it at work (this may work for qmail as well, but I think its 
> a little more picky as it has no support for /etc/hosts)

I was under the impression qmail uses the local resolver, hence
/etc/hosts should be supported via a file option in nsswitch.conf? I'll
have to go look at that.. sounds like a gotcha ;)

> exim I looked at about five years ago ... never got it working under linux. 
> It probably has improved much since then :) 

It is a pig, yes. I use eximconfig on Debian - it makes it a piece of
cake :)

> pointed to qmail instead. Postfix I config'd for work as we don't use 
> internal DNS (which is really annoying but I'm not going into the why's and 
> wherefore's ... but it will be introduced eventually, even if its through the 
> back door).

Not using internal dns is ridiculous. What _possible_ reason have they
got for not introducing it???

Cheers,

Alex.


___________________________________________________________________

Sheffield Linux User's Group - http://www.sheflug.co.uk . 
To unsubscribe from this list send mail to 
shef-lug-request@list.sheflug.org.uk with the word
"unsubscribe" in the body of the message. 

  GNU the choice of a complete generation.