| |
| |
| |
|
Comments:
<0> Hi all
<0> Can anyone please help me...
<0> I'm handling email for lets say: domain.com. But the client gets an 550 error when she wants to send the email.. The "relay" field in the log shows also something like: "h2134234dsl.speedadsl.com"
<1> hello!
<1> If I specify in DaemonPortOptions= M=a, is there any way of allowing a list of hosts to relay without authnetication (e.g. via access.db)?
<1> Alternatively, I am looking for an elegant way of allowing relaying for authenticated remote users, and without authentication for local users (from msa) and a few specified hosts. Any suggestions?
<2> Isn't that what sendmail does with access_db?
<1> sub: I haven't tried, but I am not sure if access_db overrides M=a in DaemonPortOptions
<2> What problem are you trying to solve?
<1> I am looking for an elegant way of allowing relaying for authenticated remote users, and without authentication for local users (from msa) and a few specified hosts.
<1> (and nobody else from outside)
<2> SMTP AUTH and IP addresses in access_db does that
<1> i.e. not accepting other connections
<2> Hmm
<1> let me correct myself: not accepting mail from other connections
<2> Could do with a ruleset I guess
<1> my question: does access_db override (makes an exception for the hosts listed) the M=a option?
<3> iirc, yes
<3> local users, and connections listed within access do not have to authenticate
<3> non-known address (ones which fail to exist within access_db) will require additional authentication steps, i.e. tls, smtp auth, etc.
<3> addess/ip addresses
<2> It should be trivial to check that
<3> hosts, etc.
<3> hey, I just responded to a sendmail question
<2> :)
<1> spork: :-) thanks
<1> sub: Yes, I will check, but since this will be done on a "live" server, I'd like to minimize the number of trials, and especially the number of errors :-)
<2> set up a server
<3> StR so long as you maintain the IP's / hostnames of the servers which you want to exclude from authentication steps within access_db you shouldn't have any problems
<2> Do you want me to test?
<3> of course this all ***umes you've built sendmail and your configuration file correctly =)
<1> sub: it's ok. thanks.
<1> spork he-he :) sure.
<2> str, why is it an issue btw?
<1> sub: it is not an issue, just reconfiguring sendmail to new requirements
<3> I hate parsing text
<3> =/
<1> sub: so, since I never knew for sure and never tested what takes precedence, I though't I'd ask people who might know.
<3> if this is a production server, you should always maintain a backup
<3> (both primary server backup, and additional machine to allow testing on prior to deployment)
<3> #!/usr/bin/perl -w
<3> no warnings;
<3> =)
<1> Thanks, spork and sub!
<2> str, did you try it?
<2> This spells our doom!
<2> A new scientific breakthrough may lead to women in future being able to produce sperm
Return to
#sendmail
or
Go to some related
logs:
#computers
#politics
defrag tells me to run chkdsk f
four way power molexs
#c
#microsoft
lXcomp Ubuntu
#gamedev
#openbsd
what is benzodiazephine
|
|