[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > > I've made every attempt to rectify the sendmail routing safely (avoiding
> > > any major changes to sendmail). The problem started when I configured
> > > the /etc/sendmail.cw to pull-down every local host, domain, and aliases
> > > at the server. When I made an attempt to send mail to a local host,
> > > instead of the mail forwarding to the local host - the server accepted
> > > the mail for the local host.
> >
> > Yep. If a domain is listed in sendmail.cw, it is deemed to refer to
> > the local host. If you don't want sendmail to treat the domain as
> > local, don't add it to sendmail.cw.
>
> I was referring to local as any host within the same domain. The reasons were
> to download all mail to the server, then move it on to the local hosts.
The fact remains that sendmail will not attempt to forward any message
which is destined for a domain which is in class w. If you want all
inbound mail to go via a particular server, then point all of the MX
records to that server. But don't add domains to class w unless you
want their mail to terminate at that server.
> > > I looked into many possible scenarios; first there was mailertable,
> > > pathtable, and ... Each time nothing resulted in any differences. The
> > > book refers to /usr/lib/local/mail as the default sendmail installment
> > > directory, but it was properly installed in /usr/lib/sendmail-cf by Red
> > > Hat 4.2 with a kernel 2.0.30. Someone mentioned looking into
> > > /etc/mail/relay_allo, but their is no mention of /etc/mail/relay_allo in
> > > any documentation that I could find.
> >
> > ip_allow, name_allow and relay_allow are RedHat hacks. You won't find
> > them mentioned in any sendmail documentation.
>
> Where can I find documentation on Red Hat hacks?
I have no idea; I don't use RedHat myself.
> > > The reasons for the initial changes create faster routing, posting, and
> > > sending. Without the changes, sendmail meanders around until it stumbles
> > > onto the answers correctly. In addition to the above, I also checked
> > > into crontab, but it doesn't seem to have anything to do with the
> > > routing (I... could be wrong). What is the best approach to take in a
> > > case like this?
> >
> > What exactly are you trying to achieve?
>
> I'm trying to achieve control over the mail, avoid meandering (which may
> result in lost mail or unknown host), and provide correct directional paths.
Getting mail delivered to the correct host is basically a matter of
setting up the MX records correctly. If you want mail to be delivered
to hosts which aren't accessible from the 'net, point the MX records
at a host which is accessible, and use sendmail's mailertable feature
to control how that host forwards the mail.
--
Glynn Clements <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-net" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
