Path: utzoo!utgpu!watserv1!watmath!att!att!emory!gatech!prism!gs26
From: gs26@prism.gatech.EDU (Glenn R. Stone)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.aix
Subject: Re: sendmail.cf for RS/6000 ??
Message-ID: <15755@hydra.gatech.EDU>
Date: 24 Oct 90 04:16:52 GMT
References: <871@ki.UUCP> <1990Oct20.205159.2866@turnkey.tcc.com> <3973@awdprime.UUCP> <1990Oct23.175522.10472@turnkey.tcc.com>
Reply-To: glenns@eas.gatech.edu
Organization: Dead Poets Society
Lines: 27

In <1990Oct23.175522.10472@turnkey.tcc.com> jackv@turnkey.tcc.com (Jack F. Vogel) writes:

>In article <3973@awdprime.UUCP> jeffe@sandino.austin.ibm.com (Peter Jeffe 512.823.4091) writes:
> 
>[ with regard to my suggestion to change Ruleset Zero to use relayhost...]
> 
>>I don't understand, Jack.  Why don't you use the MX record to point you
>>to the right host, instead of mucking about with ruleset 0 to kludge it
>>up?
>Well, for one thing, what if a small network/domain doesn't use a nameserver?
.... among other things...

I run a small cluster (soon to be its own subnet) of 6k's hung off gatech's
broadband.  I have found that it's much easier to just not fool with named
at all, and just let remote nameservers do the work (if you have access to 
them) or dump mail off to an appropriate smart-host (if not).  That way
you only have one config file to muck with, ergo only one place things
can go wrong.  Occam's razor (aka the KISS principle {keep it simple, stupid})
applies.  'sides, there's plenty more people who mess with sendmail out
here on the net that can help out than those who diddle with such vagaries
as named... sendmail's even big enough to have it's own group. 

(pardon the grammar, after talking C and sendmail most of the day, it's hard to 
 think like an ordinary critter :)

-- Glenn Stone
gs26@prism.gatech.edu, glenns@eas.gatech.edu