Jason Webb wrote:
Hmm.
I suppose this was what I was getting at.
But
Qmail and Sendmail both have facilities to setup SMTP routes to deliver
to alternate ports and this can't be done using DNS trickery.
However, I think a few matcher/mailet tricks will do what I want, so
I'll leave it for now.
-- Jason
> -Original Message-
> From: Serge Knystautas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 21 November 2003 20:43
> To: James Developers List
> Subject: Re: SMTP routes
>
>
> Noel J. Bergman wrote:
> >>I rather dislike this overloading approach to mailet
> c
Noel J. Bergman wrote:
I rather dislike this overloading approach to mailet configuration. I
think you'll soon end up with another Redirect mailet that few
understand and is trying to be another Swiss army knife.
Well, I hope not, but on the other hand, we did clean up the Redirect area,
and it do
Serge Knystautas wrote:
> Noel J. Bergman wrote:
> > Instead, I propose that we add an attribute that RemoteDelivery will
check,
> > for the purpose of adding dynamic gateway support. If the attribute is
> > present, RemoteDelivery treats it as the gateway for that Mail,
otherwise
> > RemoteDelive
Noel J. Bergman wrote:
Instead, I propose that we add an attribute that RemoteDelivery will check,
for the purpose of adding dynamic gateway support. If the attribute is
present, RemoteDelivery treats it as the gateway for that Mail, otherwise
RemoteDelivery operates as normal. A single mailet co
Jason Webb wrote:
> I need to develop a system to force mail delivery of certain domains
> to go to certain hosts.
> RemoteDelivery would be enhanced to support the following extra config
> directives (for example):
> SMTP routes would take priority over all other forms of mail host
> resolution
Jason Webb wrote:
I need to develop a system to force mail delivery of certain domains to
go to certain hosts.
This is due to a client having issues with their infrastructure rather
than a problem with James...
And yes, I know fixing their name servers would solve the problem, but
sometimes life is
