art@pivot.sbi.com (Art Bernstein) (02/28/91)
H E L P M E M R. W I Z A R D
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
I have a system with two ethernet addresses le0 (prod_sys) le1 (test_sys).
When mail is sent to test_sys (le1) an error is returned. The system wants
mail to be addressed to prod_sys. The systems that is sending the mail
to test_sys does not have connectivity to prod_sys from security reasons.
the error is as follows.
From Mailer-Daemon@prod_sys Tue Feb 26 21:05:58 1991
Return-Path: <Mailer-Daemon@prod_sys>
Received: from prod_sys.sbi.com (test_sys) by sysA.sbi.com (4.0/SMI-4.0)
id AA29175; Tue, 26 Feb 91 21:05:56 EST
Received: by prod_sys.sbi.com (4.1/SMI-4.1)
id AB01574; Tue, 26 Feb 91 20:52:04 EST
Date: Tue, 26 Feb 91 20:52:04 EST
From: Mailer-Daemon@prod_sys (Mail Delivery Subsystem)
Subject: Returned mail: Service unavailable
Message-Id: <9102270152.AB01574@prod_sys.sbi.com>
To: <operator@sysA>
Status: R
----- Transcript of session follows -----
Connected to test_sys:
>>> HELO prod_sys.sbi.com
<<< 553 prod_sys.sbi.com host name configuration error
554 <soakback@test_sys>... Service unavailable
----- Unsent message follows -----
Return-Path: <operator@sysA>
Received: from sysA.sbi.com by prod_sys.sbi.com (4.1/SMI-4.1)
I think that an entry in sendmail.cf will fix this problem but did not
see anything in the Documentation.
rickert@mp.cs.niu.edu (Neil Rickert) (03/01/91)
In article <1318@pivot.sbi.com> art@pivot.sbi.com (Art Bernstein) writes: > >I have a system with two ethernet addresses le0 (prod_sys) le1 (test_sys). >When mail is sent to test_sys (le1) an error is returned. The system wants That's what you get when you use two different names for the same system. (This is generally a bad practice). >I think that an entry in sendmail.cf will fix this problem but did not >see anything in the Documentation. Try: Cwtest_sys test_sys.sbi.com This should cause your alternate name to be recognized as local. -- =*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*= Neil W. Rickert, Computer Science <rickert@cs.niu.edu> Northern Illinois Univ. DeKalb, IL 60115 +1-815-753-6940
macphed@dvinci (Ian MacPhedran) (03/01/91)
From article <1318@pivot.sbi.com>, by art@pivot.sbi.com (Art Bernstein): > > I have a system with two ethernet addresses le0 (prod_sys) le1 (test_sys). > When mail is sent to test_sys (le1) an error is returned. The system wants > mail to be addressed to prod_sys. The systems that is sending the mail > to test_sys does not have connectivity to prod_sys from security reasons. > the error is as follows. > > I think that an entry in sendmail.cf will fix this problem but did not > see anything in the Documentation. You don't say what your system is, but what we do on our Suns should work for you. We use this to deliver mail for our clients locally. It seems to work okay. (Editted from our sendmail.cf) --------------------------------------------- # Mail to these nodes to be delivered locally CWclient1 client2 client3 # Map the above nodes to this node DWserver ... S0 ... R$*<$*$=W.LOCAL>$* $1<$2$W.LOCAL>$4 client.LOCAL [glh] R$*<$*$=w.LOCAL>$* $1<$2>$4 thishost.LOCAL ... (similar lines deleted.) --------------------------------------------- Any members of the W group get mapped to the server name, which gets resolved on the next line. In your case, CW would have test_sys, and DW would have prod_sys. Ian. -- Ian MacPhedran, Engineering Computer Centre, University of Saskatchewan. 2B13 Engineering Building, U. of S. Campus, Saskatoon, Sask., CANADA S7N 0W0 macphed@dvinci.USask.CA macphedran@sask.USask.CA
macphed@herald.usask.ca (Ian MacPhedran) (03/01/91)
From article <1318@pivot.sbi.com>, by art@pivot.sbi.com (Art Bernstein): > > I have a system with two ethernet addresses le0 (prod_sys) le1 (test_sys). > When mail is sent to test_sys (le1) an error is returned. The system wants > mail to be addressed to prod_sys. The systems that is sending the mail > to test_sys does not have connectivity to prod_sys from security reasons. > the error is as follows. > > I think that an entry in sendmail.cf will fix this problem but did not > see anything in the Documentation. You don't say what your system is, but what we do on our Suns should work for you. We use this to deliver mail for our clients locally. It seems to work okay. (Editted from our sendmail.cf) --------------------------------------------- # Mail to these nodes to be delivered locally CWclient1 client2 client3 # Map the above nodes to this node DWserver ... S0 ... R$*<$*$=W.LOCAL>$* $1<$2$W.LOCAL>$4 client.LOCAL [glh] R$*<$*$=w.LOCAL>$* $1<$2>$4 thishost.LOCAL ... (similar lines deleted.) --------------------------------------------- Any members of the W group get mapped to the server name, which gets resolved on the next line. In your case, CW would have test_sys, and DW would have prod_sys. Ian. -- Ian MacPhedran, Engineering Computer Centre, University of Saskatchewan. 2B13 Engineering Building, U. of S. Campus, Saskatoon, Sask., CANADA S7N 0W0 macphed@dvinci.USask.CA macphedran@sask.USask.CA
greywolf@unisoft.UUCP (The Grey Wolf) (03/05/91)
<1991Feb28.194930.22580@mp.cs.niu.edu> by rickert@mp.cs.niu.edu (Neil Rickert)
# In article <1318@pivot.sbi.com> art@pivot.sbi.com (Art Bernstein) writes:
# >
# >I have a system with two ethernet addresses le0 (prod_sys) le1 (test_sys).
# >When mail is sent to test_sys (le1) an error is returned. The system wants
#
# That's what you get when you use two different names for the same system.
# (This is generally a bad practice).
That's what you have to do when you have a machine with two (or more)
ethernet boards in it.
This is generally not avoidable unless you want to muck about with multiple
sendmail.cf files and /etc/hosts files and...well, you get the idea.
It's a lot easier to try and set up a machine with two (or more) names
than it is to manipulate different config files and try and maintain a
distribution list. The first one you only have to do once.
#
# =*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=
# Neil W. Rickert, Computer Science <rickert@cs.niu.edu>
# Northern Illinois Univ.
# DeKalb, IL 60115 +1-815-753-6940
--
# The days of the computer priesthood are not over.
# May they never be.
# If it sounds selfish, consider how most companies stay in business.rickert@mp.cs.niu.edu (Neil Rickert) (03/05/91)
In article <3414@unisoft.UUCP> greywolf@unisoft.UUCP (The Grey Wolf) writes: ><1991Feb28.194930.22580@mp.cs.niu.edu> by rickert@mp.cs.niu.edu (Neil Rickert) ># ># That's what you get when you use two different names for the same system. ># (This is generally a bad practice). > >That's what you have to do when you have a machine with two (or more) >ethernet boards in it. > Just a minute. The whole naming system is based on one system name with possibly multiple addresses. You can have multiple A-records in the DNS data base. You can have multiple lines giving different addresses to the same name in /etc/hosts. You can even enter the /etc/hosts entries as address1 official_name alias1 address2 official_name alias2 so that when starting up the system you can use the different aliases to specify the particular interfaces, but still keep the same name for each. For that matter you can use the internet address in the 'ifconfig' command to distinguish, with the advantage that if you have an /etc/resolv.conf there is no longer the extended delay while 'ifconfig' times out on all nameserver entries before reverting to read the /etc/hosts file. -- =*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*= Neil W. Rickert, Computer Science <rickert@cs.niu.edu> Northern Illinois Univ. DeKalb, IL 60115 +1-815-753-6940
ables@lot.ACA.MCC.COM (King Ables) (03/06/91)
From article <3414@unisoft.UUCP>, by greywolf@unisoft.UUCP (The Grey Wolf): > > # That's what you get when you use two different names for the same system. > # (This is generally a bad practice). > > That's what you have to do when you have a machine with two (or more) > ethernet boards in it. > > This is generally not avoidable unless you want to muck about with multiple > sendmail.cf files and /etc/hosts files and...well, you get the idea. > It's a lot easier to try and set up a machine with two (or more) names > than it is to manipulate different config files and try and maintain a > distribution list. The first one you only have to do once. Sorry, Neil is right, it is a bad practice. We have many gateway machines around here for our various local nets that have two ethernet interfaces with the same name... this is NOT a problem, this is, in fact the "normal" way to do it. And it doesn't complicate things, all of our machines (except the one definitive mail gateway) use the same (yes, EXACTLY the same) sendmail.cf file and our host tables are Yellow Pages and therefore all the same, too. It's HARDER to set the machine up with multiple names, then you have a bunch of things to keep up with (let's see, which side of the machine do I want this to work on!?)... of course, if your routing is set up right, even that isn't too much of a problem, but it's still easier with one name. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- King Ables Micro Electronics and Computer Technology Corp. ables@mcc.com 3500 W. Balcones Center Drive +1 512 338 3749 Austin, TX 78759 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------