Date: Thu, 06 Sep 2001 13:18:02 -0700 From: Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com> To: Igor Podlesny <poige@morning.ru> Cc: Gregory Neil Shapiro <gshapiro@FreeBSD.ORG>, freebsd-isp@FreeBSD.ORG, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: auto relaying for subdomains -- why? Message-ID: <3B97D9FA.BFE4AC15@mindspring.com> References: <16615694707.20010905210719@morning.ru> <15254.22980.843972.348805@horsey.gshapiro.net> <8264494448.20010906104039@morning.ru> <15254.62636.867613.151378@horsey.gshapiro.net> <7575649117.20010906134634@morning.ru>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Igor Podlesny wrote: > Now it's all clear :) and I understand that it was just a way > SENDMAIL's is configured. Another question could be why not to use > syntax .foo.bar instead of foo.bar but I'm quite ready to call it a > rhetorical one ;-)) (regexps are also there ;-) The virtusertable file syntax is such that: foo.bar <predicate> means "relay for foo.bar, but not *.foo.bar", and: .foo.bar <predicate> means "relay for *.foo.bar, but not foo.bar", and: foo.bar <predicate> .foo.bar <predicate> means "relay for both foo.bar and *.foo.bar". The value of <predicate> depends on what you want to do with the email, and it is usually a tuple consisting of a mailer and a disposition suffix for that mailer, e.g.: foo.bar local:bob .foo.bar smtp:tom@isp.com means "send all mail with an address in foo.bar to the POP3 mailbox on the local machine for the local user ``bob'', and send all mail for any delegates subdomains of foo.bar to the user ``tom'' with a mail account at another ISP named ``isp.com''". If you need to get this complicated, I suggest you read the sendmail FAQ, or buy a copy of the O'Reilly Sendmail book. > P.P.S. I'm not quite sure should I start new thread or can remain > within it with another question which is: What MTA software supports > highly configurable relaying... One of the needed features is a > support for using alternative mail routers (relays) in case when this > MTA can't send a message by itself because of networks problem. Sendmail... this is handled by the SMART_HOST feature of sendmail. > For example situation could be: MTA is on a network A which is temporarily > cut off from it's uplink so it can't transfer mail by itself, but it > has a connection (permanent or dial-up) to another mailer. Mail routing is via DNS. If you are on the other side of a dialup, you should mark the mailer expensive, set HoldExpensive to "True", and then explicitly do the queue run in your link-up script, or, if you prefer, at intervals. Generally, what you want to do is a bad idea, since the best way to handle this if you have an unreliable permanent connection, is to simply use your other connection to contact the same list of MX's that it would have contacted anyway. > Are there such MTAs which can be said "if you can't send it > by yourself (would be cool if additional parameters > were some_time_period and failure_reason) then use that MTA > (ip-addr) or that (another-ip)?". By IP address is a bad idea, though it could be done. > I suspect in common case such "system" could easily lead to > loops and have other drawbacks but in such simple > configuration it seems all should work fine... Not really. But it will take you some amount of time to configure this correctly, and to get your back end infrastructure in place. I did this work for IBM Web Connections, and it took us 3 months to do the back end stuff, and 8 months to do all the client side stuff, so that it was all turn key. Basically, you are asking for a huge technology transfer, which generally runs most ISPs several hundreds of thousands of dollars to acquire. With the questions you are asking, you will probably need to buy or license it from someone. -- Terry To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3B97D9FA.BFE4AC15>