Xref: utzoo comp.mail.elm:2793 comp.mail.uucp:4616
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!usc!ucsd!rutgers!mcdchg!chinet!les
From: les@chinet.chi.il.us (Leslie Mikesell)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.elm,comp.mail.uucp
Subject: Re: Elm Configure (multiple machines = one)
Message-ID: <1990Jul5.175844.141@chinet.chi.il.us>
Date: 5 Jul 90 17:58:44 GMT
References: <642@venice.SEDD.TRW.COM> <KZE4TMD@xds13.ferranti.com>
Organization: Chinet - Public Access UNIX
Lines: 22

In article <KZE4TMD@xds13.ferranti.com> peter@ficc.ferranti.com (Peter da Silva) writes:

>We have a network of some 30 machines that look like one machine to mail.
>I have had to make lots of changes to elm 2.2 to get it to work in this
>environment. I don't plan on upgrading to 2.3 in the near term.

Can you explain a bit more about how you did this and what problems
you encountered?  I'm considering something like this, perhaps using
smail 3.1 set up to lie in both the From_ and From: lines, and using
an alias file to resolve all user addreses.  As far as I can tell,
this would be transparent to the MUA (what did you have to do to ELM?).
Smail 3.1 can understand multiple names for the local host so there
should be no problem in accepting messages in local form or to the
common name and delivering to the specific machine from the alias list.
The main question I have is whether it would be better to modify
smail to be able to put different things on the From_ line, depending
on the destination, or to change all our external uucp connections to
use the MYNAME= feature of HDB uucp to actually look like a single machine
from the outside?

Les Mikesell
  les@chinet.chi.il.us