badri@ur-valhalla.UUCP (Badri Lokanathan) (01/12/87)
There has been a lot of discussion recently in comp.mail.headers
regarding the drawbacks of smail. In particular attention has been
drawn to the unavailability of user control on the mail paths.
In the mailaddr(7) man page of BSD4.2, under the sub-heading
route-addrs, there is mention of forcing a path on mail manually,
using the syntax
<@hosta,@hostb:user@hostc>
My question: have any smail users tried this? Ruleset S3 of
the supplied sendmail.cf has rules to to handle this. However when
I tried it, it did not work. The scenario is: I am site A (with smail)
connected to sites B and C (without smail.) Site B is also directly
connected to C. I feed news to site C at night, but send mail via site B.
Hence the mail path (chosen by smail) is
A!B!C!user
Suppose I want to forcibly send mail via A!C!user
Here are three possibilities which I tried and the results:
<@C:user> (Mail gets routed by smail and goes via A!B!C!user)
<@A:user@C> (Mail bounced back locally with the following)
A!:user@C...couldn't resolve C.
resolve 'A!:user@C' = :user @ C (0)
550 <@A:user@C>... Host unknown
<@A:C!user> (Mail bounced back locally with the following)
bad system name: :C
uux failed. code 68
resolve 'A!:C!user' = user @ :C (3)
COMMAND: /usr/bin/uux - -r :C!rmail '(user)'
550 <@A:C!user>... Host unknown
<@A!C!user> (Mail got posted to C!user@, hence barf at C.)
This leads me to believe that there is something messed up with ruleset
S3 in the sendmail.cf that I have (it has the following header:)
##### @(#)smail.cf.form 1.11 (UUCP-Project/CS) 7/13/86
Any comments/suggestions/fixes?
Badri Lokanathan
--
"We will fight for the right to be free {) ur-valhalla!badri@rochester.arpa
We will build our own society //\\ {ames,caip,cmcl2,columbia,cornell,
And we will sing, we will sing ///\\\ harvard,ll-xn,rutgers,seismo,
We will sing our own song." -UB40 _||_ topaz}!rochester!ur-valhalla!badri