igb@fulcrum.bt.co.uk (Ian G Batten) (04/09/91)
I've got a sendmail.cf skeleton written using M4 that I use on most machines here. My gateway Sun runs IDA, but the others use the same basic .cf. Until I put it on an AIX 3.1 IBM RS/6000... For some odd reason the OD, OF and OH options are thrown out! This doesn't surprise me, as the lousy sendmail on AIX 2.something on 6150s (Hey! IBM Support!) for some obscure reason didn't call Ruleset 3 before it called Ruleset 0. Why do these people feel a need to make stupid, incompatible changes to standard software? To tie people in, I guess...like the many other ludicrous changes in AIX in general. For the sendmail to identify itself as AIX 3.1/UCB 5.61 is downright nasty --- it ISN'T UCB 5.61 because it DOESN'T support D, F and H. I don't care is some IBMite tells me its in the documents. If it claims to be UCB 5.61 it bloody well ought to be UCB 5.61. ian
vixie@decwrl.dec.com (Paul A Vixie) (04/11/91)
[Ian G Batten] >> [...] for some obscure reason didn't call Ruleset 3 >> before it called Ruleset 0. IDA through 1.2.8 has that property. S3 is supposed to be idempotent, so most people just call it from the top of S0 "just to be safe". >> I don't care is some IBMite tells me its in the documents. If it claims >> to be UCB 5.61 it bloody well ought to be UCB 5.61. Agreed. Cheers, -- Paul Vixie DEC Western Research Lab <vixie@pa.dec.com> <paul@vixie.sf.ca.us> Palo Alto, California, USA ...!decwrl!vixie ...!vixie!paul
rickert@mp.cs.niu.edu (Neil Rickert) (04/11/91)
In article <1991Apr10.214922.23442@pa.dec.com> vixie@decwrl.dec.com (Paul A Vixie) writes: >[Ian G Batten] >>> [...] for some obscure reason didn't call Ruleset 3 >>> before it called Ruleset 0. > >IDA through 1.2.8 has that property. S3 is supposed to be idempotent, >so most people just call it from the top of S0 "just to be safe". Just to make sure there is no confusion. In test mode, and ONLY in test mode, the IDA sendmails do not first call ruleset 3. In normal operations ruleset 3 is always called first. There is a message printed out in testmode warning you that ruleset 3 is not automatically called. Not calling ruleset 3 in testmode is actually a of benefit when testing other rules. -- =*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*= Neil W. Rickert, Computer Science <rickert@cs.niu.edu> Northern Illinois Univ. DeKalb, IL 60115 +1-815-753-6940
ylee@csl.dl.nec.com (Ying-Da Lee) (04/12/91)
In article <1991Apr10.214922.23442@pa.dec.com> vixie@decwrl.dec.com (Paul A Vixie) writes: > >S3 is supposed to be idempotent, >so most people just call it from the top of S0 "just to be safe". Is it really stated in any "formal" document that S3 is to be idempotent? This is news to me and there are a great number of sendmail.cf's out there that have non-idempotent S3. None of Sun's sendmail.cf's I have seen, for example, have idempotent S3. Ying-Da Lee NEC America C&C Software Development Lab ylee@csl.dl.nec.com uunet!necbsd!ylee
rickert@mp.cs.niu.edu (Neil Rickert) (04/12/91)
In article <1991Apr12.145344.7135@csl.dl.nec.com> ylee@csl.dl.nec.com (Ying-Da Lee) writes: > >Is it really stated in any "formal" document that S3 is to be >idempotent? This is news to me and there are a great number of >sendmail.cf's out there that have non-idempotent S3. None of >Sun's sendmail.cf's I have seen, for example, have idempotent S3. I do not know of anything in sendmail that requires S3 be idempotent. It is very common for the first few rules of S3 to convert User Name <user@domain> into just user@domain and it is very common for the last few rules to convert user@domain into user<@domain> With such a practice, S3 cannot be idempotent. What is sometimes done is for another ruleset to convert 'user<@domain>' back to 'user@domain' then run it through ruleset S3 again. This usually happens after some reformatting, such as converting a!b into b@a.uucp. -- =*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*= Neil W. Rickert, Computer Science <rickert@cs.niu.edu> Northern Illinois Univ. DeKalb, IL 60115 +1-815-753-6940
ylee@csl.dl.nec.com (Ying-Da Lee) (04/12/91)
In article <1991Apr12.155948.29233@mp.cs.niu.edu> rickert@mp.cs.niu.edu (Neil Rickert) writes: >In article <1991Apr12.145344.7135@csl.dl.nec.com> ylee@csl.dl.nec.com (Ying-Da Lee) writes: >> >>Is it really stated in any "formal" document that S3 is to be >>idempotent? This is news to me and there are a great number of >>sendmail.cf's out there that have non-idempotent S3. None of >>Sun's sendmail.cf's I have seen, for example, have idempotent S3. > > I do not know of anything in sendmail that requires S3 be idempotent. That's my point. It bothers me to see bold assertion that 'S3 is supposed to be idempotent' without supporting evidence. I have seen no such requirement either in documentation or in actual practice. Ying-Da Lee ylee@csl.dl.nec.com uunet!necbsd!ylee
vixie@pa.dec.com (Paul Vixie) (04/16/91)
In article <1991Apr12.145344.7135@csl.dl.nec.com> ylee@csl.dl.nec.com said:
# [...]
# idempotent? This is news to me and there are a great number of
# sendmail.cf's out there that have non-idempotent S3. None of
# Sun's sendmail.cf's I have seen, for example, have idempotent S3.
No vendor I know of (please look at my return address before you flame me)
ships a sendmail.cf that's worth lining bird cages with. The closest thing
to a reasonable config is the one that comes in the sendmail kit from UCB.
There are some "after market" configs that work pretty well, including UK
and IDA.
But nothing in the commercial space works. Including the one you mention.
--
Paul Vixie
DEC Western Research Lab <vixie@pa.dec.com> <paul@vixie.sf.ca.us>
Palo Alto, California, USA ...!decwrl!vixie ...!vixie!paul