Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!ut-emx!ibmchs!auschs!awdprime!sandino.austin.ibm.com!jeffe
From: jeffe@sandino.austin.ibm.com (Peter Jeffe 512.823.4091)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.aix
Subject: Re: sendmail.cf for RS/6000 ??
Message-ID: <4034@awdprime.UUCP>
Date: 26 Oct 90 02:34:18 GMT
References: <871@ki.UUCP> <1990Oct20.205159.2866@turnkey.tcc.com> <3973@awdprime.UUCP> <1990Oct23.175522.10472@turnkey.tcc.com>
Sender: news@awdprime.UUCP
Organization: IBM AWD, Austin, TX
Lines: 27

In article <1990Oct23.175522.10472@turnkey.tcc.com> jackv@turnkey.TCC.COM (Jack F. Vogel) writes:
>> [ my suggestion to use MX records rather than hacking ruleset 0 ]
>
>Well, for one thing, what if a small network/domain doesn't use a nameserver?

Then they definitely can't query it for MX records :-)

>The configuration I was thinking of is where what we want to do is
>pass all domain addresses not in our domain via uucp to, say, uunet.

Ahhh, so sorry.  If you're trying to get out using uucp there's no way
the MX can get you there directly; sendmail will try to connect() to
whomever it's pointed to by the MX record.  But there's still a way to
do this if you designate a gateway host and point to it with the MX;
then all he needs to do is understand how to deal with the mail.  This
may be a better solution in terms of maintenance, and there may well be
a better solution than this, but I can't think of it.

In any case, I will recommend that AIX include optional rules that pass
unknown addresses to a relay host, since this seems to be a popular
mail configuration, and we should have a way of doing this without the
user having to do major rewrite rule hacking.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Peter Jeffe   ...uunet!cs.utexas.edu!ibmchs!auschs!sandino.austin.ibm.com!jeffe
        first they want a disclaimer, then they make you pee in a jar,
                   then they come for you in the night