adnan@sgtech.uucp (Adnan Yaqub) (12/06/90)
[Note: I am running Interactive Unix 2.2 and their TCP/IP and sendmail on a 386 box.] I could use your help. I have a configuration of sendmail which seems do just what I want when I test it using "sendmail -bt". However, when I try to actually send mail, I always get "Host unknown" messages for any address with a host name attached. For example, if I do "sendmail -bt" and put "0 adnan@chubsie" in as a test (assuming that "chubsie" is in my local domain, which is "sgtech.uucp", and can be reached via ethernet), I get back as the output of rule 0: rewrite: ruleset 0 returns: "^V" "ether" "^W" "chubsie" "^X" "adnan" "@" "chubsie" "." "sgtech" "." "uucp" Which is what I expect. However, when I send mail to adnan@chubsie I always get: 550 adnan@chubsie... Host unknown Any ideas? -- Adnan Yaqub (adnan@sgtech.uucp) Star Gate Technologies 29300 Aurora Rd, Solon, OH, 44139, USA, +1 216 349 1860
karl_kleinpaste@cis.ohio-state.edu (12/06/90)
adnan@sgtech.uucp writes:
rewrite: ruleset 0 returns: "^V" "ether" "^W" "chubsie" "^X" "adnan"
"@" "chubsie" "." "sgtech" "." "uucp"
However, when I send mail to adnan@chubsie I always get:
550 adnan@chubsie... Host unknown
A couple of things. Most fundamentally, if sendmail is resolving a
host to "chubsie.sgtech.uucp," then your hosts table (not being on the
Internet, I assume you use /etc/hosts) must contain an IP entry for
that host by exactly that name. Having an entry for just "chubsie" is
insufficient within this context; the full name is required. Add it
to the relevant line of your hosts table, e.g.,
192.193.194.5 chubsie chubsie.sgtech.uucp
Somewhat more mundanely...t'ain't no such domain as "sgtech.uucp" in a
Real Sense. The top-level domain ".uucp" is a hack instigated vaguely
of necessity by the UUCP Project when getting registrations going and
when creating smail 2.x. Having hosts within that domain is a bit
bizarre at best. You'd do much better to register a real domain and
use it for all news/mail-related correspondence. Then you could have
(presumably) "chubsie.sgtech.com" in your hosts table, things would
look a lot more like the rest of the universe expects it to look, and
more of the world would be able (to say nothing of more willing) to
correspond with you in the first place.les@chinet.chi.il.us (Leslie Mikesell) (12/08/90)
In article <KARL.90Dec5224122@giza.cis.ohio-state.edu> karl_kleinpaste@cis.ohio-state.edu writes: >Somewhat more mundanely...t'ain't no such domain as "sgtech.uucp" in a >Real Sense. The top-level domain ".uucp" is a hack instigated vaguely >of necessity by the UUCP Project when getting registrations going and >when creating smail 2.x. Having hosts within that domain is a bit >bizarre at best. Has anyone considered an internet nameserver for .uucp? Or is this one of those silly questions where everyone else already knows why something so obvious isn't being done? The .uucp appendage doesn't mean anything to real uucp sites - it had to be intended as syntactic sugar to coax internet sites into believing that they really exist. If Rutgers or Uunet (or anyone else, for that matter) would provide name service for everything in the uucp maps the illusion would be complete and everyone else could stop treating .uucp as a special case. Is this physically or politically impossible, or is no one willing to do it? >You'd do much better to register a real domain and >use it for all news/mail-related correspondence. People keep using postal analogies about electronic mail: Go to post office - clerk says: "Sorry sir, we can't handle your mail until you change your name. The forms are available at ... " Les Mikesell les@chinet.chi.il.us
kaul@icarus.eng.ohio-state.edu (Rich Kaul) (12/09/90)
In article <1990Dec07.200835.20108@chinet.chi.il.us> les@chinet.chi.il.us (Leslie Mikesell) writes:
People keep using postal analogies about electronic mail:
Go to post office - clerk says: "Sorry sir, we can't handle your
mail until you change your name. The forms are available at ... "
Wrong analogy. Try:
Go to post office - clerk says: "Sorry sir, we can't handle your mail
until you use a complete address."
--
Rich Kaul | It wouldn't be research if we
kaul@icarus.eng.ohio-state.edu | knew what we were doing.oc@vmp.com (Orlan Cannon) (12/09/90)
In article <1990Dec07.200835.20108@chinet.chi.il.us> les@chinet.chi.il.us (Leslie Mikesell) writes: >In article <KARL.90Dec5224122@giza.cis.ohio-state.edu> karl_kleinpaste@cis.ohio-state.edu writes: > >>Somewhat more mundanely...t'ain't no such domain as "sgtech.uucp" in a >>Real Sense. The top-level domain ".uucp" is a hack instigated vaguely >>of necessity by the UUCP Project when getting registrations going and >>when creating smail 2.x. Having hosts within that domain is a bit >>bizarre at best. > >Has anyone considered an internet nameserver for .uucp? Or is this >one of those silly questions where everyone else already knows >why something so obvious isn't being done? > >The .uucp appendage doesn't mean anything to real uucp sites - it >had to be intended as syntactic sugar to coax internet sites into >believing that they really exist. If Rutgers or Uunet (or anyone >else, for that matter) would provide name service for everything >in the uucp maps the illusion would be complete and everyone >else could stop treating .uucp as a special case. > >Is this physically or politically impossible, or is no one willing >to do it? Gee, Les, I seem to remember the first documents I got about the UUCP Project. I vaguely recall that the idea was to register all the UUCP sites just like the Internet sites and set up a not-for-profit nameserver just to handle the correct routing of this kind of mail. Thus was UUNET born. (Can anyone fill me in on this part of UUNET history?) Of course, now UUNET is a for-profit corporation, and its goals and responsibilities are less defined. The main thing I hear from them on the net these days is apologies for mail getting severely backed up at Internet sites because they can only handle something like 200 concurrent sendmail processes (or something like that). I think the original concept is absurd because noone really knows the true extent of the UUCP world. Especially now that there are so many implementations of UUCP in the non-Unix world that are connecting to the UUCP mail network. As a for-profit company, UUNET has to try to get maximum usage from their hardware, which means delays, slower throughput, but increased real "throughput", regardless of what their critics say. (Can you imagine what these mail-deliviery problems would be like *without* UUNET?) My personal feeling? UUNET is a great start, but they're close to overloaded. We need to start the UUCP Project all over again. Perhaps a not-for-profit UUNET2? -- Orlan Cannon oc@vmp.com Video Marketing & Publications, Inc. (800) 627-4551 Oradell, NJ 07649
mcr@Latour.Sandelman.OCUnix.On.Ca (Michael Richardson) (12/12/90)
[followup's to comp.mail.misc. This doesn't really belong in comp.mail.sendmail. Some might think comp.mail.uucp might be more k appropriate though -- change the followup] In article <1990Dec8.234514.11668@vmp.com> oc@vmp.com (Orlan Cannon) writes: >sites just like the Internet sites and set up a not-for-profit >nameserver just to handle the correct routing of this kind of mail. >Thus was UUNET born. (Can anyone fill me in on this part of UUNET >history?) This was not entirely the way I understood uunet's creation. >My personal feeling? UUNET is a great start, but they're close to >overloaded. We need to start the UUCP Project all over again. >Perhaps a not-for-profit UUNET2? I had also understood that there might eventually be multiple uunet-like sites. But I don't think that making .UUCP official is such a good idea either. What needs to be done is to encourage people to start registering under their municipal domains. I understand that .us doesn't want people registering AND having sub-domains. I really can't fanthom the reasons for this kind of thing. It just seems silly to me. So does .com -- what is wrong with .com.us? (Other than its length) You likely can't reply to the address in the From: of the post --- I'm still waiting for the ocunix.on.ca MX to appear. -- :!mcr!: | The postmaster never | So much mail, Michael Richardson | resolves twice. | so few cycles. mcr@julie.UUCP/michael@fts1.UUCP/mcr@doe.carleton.ca -- Domain address - Pay attention only to _MY_ opinions. - registration in progress.
marty@speedy.UUCP (J. Martin Strakhovsky) (12/24/90)
In article <59@sgtech.UUCP>, adnan@sgtech.uucp (Adnan Yaqub) writes: > [Note: I am running Interactive Unix 2.2 and their TCP/IP and sendmail > on a 386 box.] I also had the same trouble with Interactive 2.2 untill I discovered that any host in my domain that I wanted to send mail to had to be in my host file with its full domain name. ie. host "scorp" has to also have "scorp.ma02.bull.com" in my host file. This is even though we are using a mail server in our domain.