HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: chris@visionware.co.uk (Chris Davies)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.sendmail
Subject: Re: Replacing UUCP with SMTP in this age...
Date: 10 Sep 92 10:47:10 GMT
Organization: VisionWare Ltd., Leeds, UK
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4

ckd@eff.org (Christopher Davis) writes:
: Options I've seen used include the old standby UUCP-over-TCP, a "finger
: trigger" where fingering the 'server' causes it to flush the queue for
: that client, and there's always the TURN command in SMTP, if anyone ever
: implemented it ;-)

Assuming your client is prepared to issue commands after connection, a
more transparent (to the server) hack is to execute the command
"/usr/lib/sendmail -q" on the server - it forces a queue run to deliver
any email to hosts that are now reachable.  Unless, of course, you know
different (or you're running a version of Unix which doesn't have
execute permission for world on sendmail).  Again this presupposes
sendmail rather than smail3 or mmdf (about which I know near enough
nothing).

Chris
--
            VISIONWARE LTD, 57 Cardigan Lane, LEEDS LS4 2LE, England
  Tel +44 532 788858 x238.  Fax +44 532 304676.  Email chris@visionware.co.uk
---------- "VisionWare:   The home of DOS/SQL/UNIX/X/VMS integration" ---------
From: waid@bobcat.ent.ohiou.edu (James Waid  ECE-GRAD)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.sendmail
Subject: Prodigy mail
Date: 15 Sep 92 21:23:58 GMT
Organization: College Of Engg. & Tech., Ohio University. Athens


	I would like to be able to send mail to someone who has a
	Prodigy account...  does anyone know how to route mail to get
	it to a Prodigy account?????  Please respond via email.

						Jim

						waid@bobcat.ent.ohiou.edu

-- 

To Boldly Go Where No One Has Gone Before..........
waid@bobcat.ent.ohiou.edu
Newsgroups: comp.mail.sendmail
From: avolio@dco.dec.com (Frederick M. Avolio)
Subject: Re: How to make sendmail Do The Right Thing with UUCP
Originator: avolio@gildor.dco.dec.com
Reply-To: avolio@dco.dec.com
Organization: Digital Equipment Corp., Washington ULTRIX Resource Center
Date: Mon, 7 Sep 1992 19:14:44 GMT


You can't do it with the ``stock'' software.  You need to use SMAIL or you
need IDA Sendmail, or both.  At least use IDA Sendmail or the King James
Sendmail of Paul Vixie, available on decwrl.dec.com.

Fred
Newsgroups: comp.mail.sendmail
From: rickert@mp.cs.niu.edu (Neil Rickert)
Subject: Re: IDA: hostnames vs. MX records
Organization: Northern Illinois University
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 17:52:31 GMT

In article <rhoward.716221816@matd> rhoward@matd.gatech.edu (Robert L. Howard) writes:
>
>Sending to 'foobar@gtri.gatech.edu' works too.  It's 'foobar@gtri' that
>fails.  In this case no ruleset (including 8) tries to attach a
>'.gatech.edu' to the end.  Thus, sendmail just punts to the campus
>central mail server (which happens to be gatech.edu).  The typescript
>of the 4 example addresses are attached followed by my M4 file.

You can change this by recompiling sendmail with NO_WILDCARD_MX defined
in conf.h .  However I don't recommend doing so, for if anybody ever
adds a wildcard MX record to your nameserver, sendmail will start adding
your domain name to everything (as in 'uunet.uu.net.gatech.edu').

A better approach is to start using a DOMAINTABLE, with an entry to
map 'gtri' to 'gtri.gatech.edu'.
From: famsvw@v7.vitro.com
Newsgroups: comp.mail.sendmail
Subject: Re: Sendmail/IDA - bitnet forwarding
Date: 7 Sep 92 13:58:12 -0500
Organization: Vitro Corporation

In article <1992Sep2.140410.9216@ulowell.ulowell.edu>, oneill@cs.ulowell.edu (Brian 'Doc' O'Neill) writes:
> I want my sendmail process to automatically route bitnet addresses to the
> RELAY_HOST entry, but for some reason it won't. bitnet is defined as a
> PSUEDODOMAIN, and it appears that it should be treated similar to UUCP mail
> and forwarded to RELAY_HOST but doesn't. Any ideas on how to correct this?
> 
> Also, my RELAY_HOST, for some reason, when given a BITNET address, does not
> consult the PATHTABLE at all, instead it tells me the host is unknown...the
> PATHTABLE does have a .bitnet entry...
> 
> =======================================================================
> Brian O'Neill - Systems Manager, Computer Science 	 (508) 934-3645
> University of Massachusetts at Lowell
> Internet: oneill@ulowell.edu		Moderator, comp.binaries.ibm.pc
From: rdc30@nmrdc1.nmrdc.nnmc.navy.mil (Code-03 LCDR Michael E. Dobson)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.sendmail
Subject: Re: Replacing UUCP with SMTP in this age...
Date: 10 Sep 92 15:33:16 GMT
Organization: Naval Medical Research & Development Command

In article <CKD.92Sep9194820@loiosh.eff.org> ckd@eff.org (Christopher Davis) writes:
>VA> == Vikas Aggarwal <aggarwal@tigger.jvnc.net> 
>
> VA> More and more people are moving to dialup IP protocols like SLIP, CSLIP
> VA> and PPP. IN all of these 'dialup' cases, mail has to be typically stored
> VA> on another system and transferred when the dialup system connects.
>
> VA> Typically, UUCP provides a very good store and transfer mechanism.
> VA> What I need (and I think is needed by a lot in this community), is
> VA> a similar functionality using IP instead of UUCP.
>
>Options I've seen used include the old standby UUCP-over-TCP, a "finger
>trigger" where fingering the 'server' causes it to flush the queue for
>that client, and there's always the TURN command in SMTP, if anyone ever
>implemented it ;-)

Another option is the use of POP clients and servers.  We do that here,
especially for DOS users, over SLIP.  This does require an account for each
user on the server and doesn't help for dial-up machines with multiple users.
It does work quite well, especially for those users who travel a lot and
want their e-mail on their laptops.
-- 
LCDR Mike Dobson, Sys Admin for | Internet: rdc30@nmrdc1.nmrdc.nnmc.navy.mil
nmrdc1.nmrdc.nnmc.navy.mil      | UUCP:   ...uunet!mimsy!nmrdc1!rdc30
AT&T 3B2/600G Sys V R 3.2.3     | BITNET:   dobson@usuhsb or nrd0mxd@vmnmdsc
WIN/TCP for 3B2  R3.2           | MCI-Mail: 377-2719 or 0003772719@mcimail.com
Newsgroups: comp.mail.sendmail
From: pascoe@rocky.gte.com (Dave Pascoe)
Subject: Bounced mail > root w/ no body?
Organization: GTE/SCSD - Needham Heights, MA
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL5
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 21:45:55 GMT

Under Sendmail-5.65c+IDA is there a way to not have the body of a 
bounced message get sent to root?  I know under Sun's sendmail the
body of the message never bounced, only headers.

--
Dave Pascoe	
Internet: pascoe@rocky.gte.com
GTE/SCSD - Needham Heights, MA
From: elitman@wam.umd.edu (Eric A. Litman)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.sendmail
Subject: Assigning incoming mail to an MX site
Date: 14 Sep 92 21:01:03 GMT
Organization: U. of Maryland, College Park.
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL5

I have recently registered and received a domainname 'nxstep.com' which I
would like to use for incoming/outgoing mail. Until now, I have been using
a relay machine to forward my mail. People have been sending mail to an
account I have on a local system (elitman@wam.umd.edu) and I have had the
uucp address to which the incoming mail should be forwarded in the .forward
file for that account (phenom!elitman@uu.american.edu). On uu.american.edu
there is an entry in the aliases database for each of the users on phenom, so 
that all incoming mail will be forwarded to phenom.

I have been told that the best thing to do would be to set up a wildcard MX
record for nxstep.com, and have the sendmail.cf file on uu.american.edu
translate all incoming mail for user@nxstep.com to !phenom!user.

Is this the right way to do this? Is there a more efficient method? If not,
any help on how to implement this would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks in advance.

--
Eric A. Litman  #import <std/disclaimer.h> | NeXTMail, MIME accepted - please 
U. of Maryland, NeXT Campus Consultant     | indicate in Subject line.
From: blaes@ernohb.UUCP (Rainer Blaes)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.sendmail
Subject: SMTP--- X.400 Ruleset
Date: 11 Sep 92 12:18:49 GMT
Organization: Erno Raumfahrttechnik GmbH, Bremen, Germany


 Dear Experts,

 if this is a FAQ, sorry but how can one modify the 'sendmail.cf' file in order
 to send mail let's say from a SUN to the next SMTP/X.400 gateway.

 I'm a beginner in the ruleset manipulation and not so familiar with the
 rewrite rules.

 Many thanks in advance and please e-mail directly to:

 blaes%vim_s@ernohb.uucp
Newsgroups: comp.mail.sendmail
From: markd@csqx.cs.rhbnc.ac.uk (Mark Damerell)
Subject: Configure sendmail, help please
Reply-To: markd@csqx.cs.rhbnc.ac.uk (Mark Damerell)
Organization: Dept of Comp Sci, Royal Holloway & Bedford New College Uni London
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1992 13:54:36 GMT

Trying to configure sendmail, made a mess of it, please can anybody advise?

1. First problem is that any user might log in to any machine. Therefore it
seems that the system mailboxes for incoming mail must all be in the same
place. So I named one machine as the mailhost (call it HUB) & arranged for
all incoming mail to appear on HUB in files called

/usr/spool/mail/username

Then all the other machines use NFS to mount the /usr/spool/mail directory.

2. The next problem is that on the satellite machines (say  S1, S2...) NFS
does not allow root to have privileged access to a mounted directory. So it
seems that when  sendmail  on any satellite receives any piece of mail, it
must explicitly use the tcp mailer to send that mail to the hub. So for
each of the satellites, I wrote a   .cf  file whose  Ruleset 0  says:

R$+	$#tcp$@mailhost$:$1

Sometimes this seems to work, at other times it goes badly wrong. The
symptom is that large numbers of sendmail processes appear on  satellite
machines. After a while you start getting console messages about "too many
hops". These processes cannot be killed by any ordinary method, a kill
command gets a "no such process" error. What seems to be happening is that
each sendmail process spawns a child, then the parent dies. If you do 
ps ax    to find the PID of one of these runaways, then by the time you
have read the PID and typed a kill, that process has killed itself. 

I dont know what is starting this off, but it seems likely that the
sequence of events is something like this:

User on S1 sends a message to somebody
Sendmail reads the Ruleset 0, tries to pass the message to mailhost.
Mailhost rejects it (or maybe is down).
Sendmail tries to post an error.
Sendmail reads Ruleset 0, tries to send error to mailhost.


but after a while, the messages seem to be   MAILER_DAEMON at  S1
sending to       MAILER_DAEMON at  S1  ,   so I suspect that the
sequence of events suggested above is not the whole story.

So please: what is the right way to configure sendmail in the situation of
(1) above? and how to arrange a reliable route for error messages if the 
mailhost is down? THanks, MArk
From: iscyeoak@nuscc.nus.sg (YEO ANN KIAN)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.sendmail
Subject: .forward
Date: 15 Sep 92 02:52:00 GMT
Organization: National University of Singapore

To further clarify my message earlier:

The remote host did receive the forwarded mail.
The problem is that a copy is left with the local node which
is not intended by the user.
The question is: how to configure the sendmail such that it won't
leave a local copy behind if the mail is to be forwarded to somewhere else?

--
AnnKian Yeo
yeoak@iscs.nus.sg
Newsgroups: comp.mail.sendmail
From: phil@eecs.nwu.edu (William LeFebvre)
Subject: Re: What's special about port 25 ?
Organization: EECS Department, Northwestern University
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 15:54:51 GMT

In article <1992Sep8.141247.8306@aau.dk>, adminpb@aau.dk (Nis Peder Bonde) writes:
|> I have made a little change in my Sendmail.mc-file.
...
|> When testing the rule, it seems to work fine:
...
|> But: When I telnet to port 25 of the machine to do the same job, I doesn't:
...
|> How come?

Did you restart the sendmail daemon?  Sendmail reads the configuration
file once when started.  If the configuration file is changed, any
daemon sendmail will need to be restarted.  Typically, it is a daemon
which listens on port 25 (started with "sendmail -bd").  In this case,
I suspect that the daemon was still running with the old idea of the
configuration.

		William LeFebvre
		Computing Facilities Manager and Analyst
		Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science
		Northwestern University
		<phil@eecs.nwu.edu>
From: swlodin@kocrsv01.delcoelect.com (Steve Lodin)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.sendmail
Subject: Re: Removing msg body in IDA for postmaster
Date: 8 Sep 92 13:17:28 GMT
Organization: Delco Electronics Corp.
Originator: swlodin@kocrsw15


In article <Bu6su3.G7F@rahul.net>, dhesi@rahul.net (Rahul Dhesi) writes:
> Here are very unofficial diffs for IDA sendmail so it will accept the
> OP option as follows:
> 
>    OP      -- send headers of bounced mail to postmaster
>    OPname  -- send headers of bounced mail to specified name
>    OP+     -- send complete bounced message to postmaster
>    OP+name -- send complete bounced message to specified name
> 


I like this flexibility.  Neil and Paul, what are your comments on
this?


Steve
-- 
Steve Lodin	Internet: swlodin@kocrsv01.delcoelect.com  UUCP: deaes!swlodin

#include	<standard.disclaimer>
#include	<fancy.pseudo.graphics>
Newsgroups: comp.mail.sendmail
From: jester@crash.cts.com (Ken Bibb)
Subject: sendmail diffs: ida and mx?
Date: 7 Sep 92 05:26:05 GMT
Keywords: what the?

What makes IDA and MX different from normal sendmail and when is it
advantageous to use them?  Where can I find documentation on these
versions?  (I've finally found something on normal sendmail
(Nemeth/Snyder/Seebass "Unix System Administration Handbook" as rec'd
by this newsgroup) but it doesn't cover these versions.  Or I didn't
notice it....)
--
Ken			"You're right about the moon
jester@crash.cts.com	 but wrong about the stars"--J. Browne
ucsd!crash!jester
From: rickert@mp.cs.niu.edu (Neil Rickert)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.sendmail
Subject: Re: Final newline required??
Date: 11 Sep 92 21:55:33 GMT
Distribution: comp.mail.sendmail
Organization: Northern Illinois University

In article <CYTRON.92Sep10132154@helios.dfci.harvard.edu> cytron@helios.dfci.harvard.edu (Andrew Cytron) writes:
>
>Hello, 
>
>I am trying to ascertain if a final newline is required for messages 
>by the sendmail/the standard for INTERNET TEXT MESSAGES (rfc822).  I looked
>over rfc822 and the sendmail man pages but could find no mention  of this.

RFC822 defines the message as a sequence of lines, with each line ending
in CRLF.  Thus the last character must be LF (which is the same as the
Unix newline).

Perhaps you were really asking if there must be an empty line as the
last line of the message?  If this was you question, then the answer is
NO.  There is no such requirement.  In a typical unix setup, the delivery
agent (often /bin/mail) will add a final empty line if the message does
not already end in one.  But this is because the unix mailbox format
requires an empty line before the next "From " line.
Newsgroups: comp.mail.sendmail
From: iscyeoak@nuscc.nus.sg (YEO ANN KIAN)
Subject: .forward
Organization: National University of Singapore
Distribution: world 
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 08:54:06 GMT

Has anybody see the following problem?

We ran sendmail 5.65c+IDA-1.4.4 on our Sparc 2.
Somehow our sendmail leaves every copy of mail of a user in the local host
even though .forward (to another node) is present in his home dir?
Any idea pls?

--
AnnKian Yeo
yeoak@iscs.nus.sg
Newsgroups: comp.mail.sendmail
From: rickert@mp.cs.niu.edu (Neil Rickert)
Subject: Re: MX chaining to MXs?
Organization: Northern Illinois University
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 11:52:00 GMT

In article <193nr3INNd5k@plts.uucp> tal@plts.uucp (Tom Limoncelli) writes:
>So, when a site tries to send to foo@hocc.org, the MX record will
>redirect the message to warren.mentorg.com, which has a (wildcard) MX
>record to go to rainbow.mentorg.com, which will know the real way to
>get to warren.mentorg.com (since it is inside the firewall), which will
>know how to deliver to hocc.org.

No.  You can't do that.  MX records are not transitive (cannot be chained).

Best method:  Have an MX record pointing to rainbow.mentorg.com, and have
that host set up to forward the message to warren.mentorg.com.

Alternative method:

hocc.org.	IN	MX	0	warren.mentorg.com.
		IN	MX	10	rainbow.mentorg.com.

A host will try to send to warren.  The attempt will time out, and it will
connect to the second choice of rainbow.  The disadvantage is that every
message will make a first false attempt, and some mailers don't try
more than one MX address.
From: tal@plts.uucp (Tom Limoncelli)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.sendmail
Subject: MX chaining to MXs?
Date: 15 Sep 1992 00:12:19 -0400
Organization: P.L.T.S., North Plainfield, New Jersey, USA
NNTP-Posting-Host: plts.uucp

I would like to set up a domain and an MX record for my home machine.
It would be hocc.org with a MX record pointing to warren.mentorg.com.

However...  Due to a firewall at mentorg.com, there is a wildcard MX
record for mentorg.com.

So, when a site tries to send to foo@hocc.org, the MX record will
redirect the message to warren.mentorg.com, which has a (wildcard) MX
record to go to rainbow.mentorg.com, which will know the real way to
get to warren.mentorg.com (since it is inside the firewall), which will
know how to deliver to hocc.org.

Is this allowed?  I know some DNS records can't be chained, can MX
records?

Will I have a problem setting up this domain?

Thanks in advance,
Tom
-- 
Tom Limoncelli -- tal@plts.uucp (home) -- tal@warren.mentorg.com (work)
"Families should be more like the Waltons instead of the Simpsons" -G. Bush;
"But we *are* like the Waltons: we're waiting for the Depression to end,
too!" -B. Simpson 8/20;    S7/2 b+ g l+ y z- n++ o++ x++ a-- u+ v+ j+ PIG8/5
Newsgroups: comp.mail.sendmail
Subject: Sendmail bug - use of "Text:" and "Message:" headers?
From: Andy.Linton@comp.vuw.ac.nz (Andy Linton)
Date: Sun, 6 Sep 1992 02:03:55 GMT
Organization: Dept of Comp Science, Victoria Uni, Wellington, NEW ZEALAND


In IDA sendmail and other versions, in the file conf.c, there are two headers,
"text" and "message", included in the structure 'struct hdrinfo HdrInfo[]'.
I've weeded this down a bit but, e.g.

struct hdrinfo  HdrInfo[] =
{
...
                /* message identification and control */
        "message-id",           0,
        "resent-message-id",    H_RESENT,
        "message",              H_EOH,
        "text",                 H_EOH,
...
        NULL,                   0,
};

This means that a message which is received with either of these headers
included is munged - see the example below.

In Appendix D of 'Sendmail Installation and Operation Guide' I see the
following:

The "Message:" and "Text:" fields will terminate the header; these are specified
in new protocols [NBS80] or used by random dissenters around the network world.

Here's the reference:

[NBS80] National Bureau of Standards, Specification of a Draft Message Format
	Standard. Report No. ICST/CBOS 80-2. October 1980.

Now I see a possibly related but different bibliographic reference to NBS at the
end of RFC 822:

	NBS.  "Specification of Message Format for Computer Based Message
        Systems, Recommended Federal Information Processing Standard."
        National  Bureau   of   Standards:    Gaithersburg,   Maryland
        (October 1981).

but nowhere do I see in RFC822 (or RFC 1123) any indication that these headers
should be supported or that the above documents should be read in conjunction
with the RFC. As someone who sees RFC 822 as the "one true faith" (:-),
I'm very unhappy about being a 'random dissenter'.

I believe that these headers should *NOT* be recognised by 'sendmail' and this
behaviour is just plain wrong.
e.g.

If I post a message using MH 'comp' with headers like:
--
Text: hello
To: asjl
Subject: test

hello
--

It arrives as:

--
From Andy.Linton@comp.vuw.ac.nz Sun Sep  6 13:57:33 1992
Received: from debretts.comp.vuw.ac.nz by kaukau.comp.vuw.ac.nz id <AA09298@kauk
au.comp.vuw.ac.nz>
  (5.65cVUW/5.2 for <asjl>) with SMTP; Sun, 6 Sep 1992 13:57:32 +1200
Date: Sun, 6 Sep 1992 13:57:32 +1200
From: Andy Linton <Andy.Linton@comp.vuw.ac.nz>
Message-Id: <199209060157.AA09298@kaukau.comp.vuw.ac.nz>
Apparently-To: <asjl@comp.vuw.ac.nz>
Status: R

text
To: asjl
Subject: test
Date: Sun, 06 Sep 1992 13:57:32 +1200

hello
--

Has anybody got a reference for me that says otherwise?
From: larry@gator.rn.com (Larry Snyder)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.sendmail
Subject: routing
Date: 7 Sep 92 14:06:29 GMT
Organization: The Gator Public Access Unix Site - 219-289-3745

I am using sendmail and have a paths database --

how do I route everything for *.edu, *.com, *.mil to one
internet host for forwarding and everything in the paths
database to another host?

-- 
Larry Snyder                                    internet: larry@gator.rn.com
keeper of the Gator                                  uucp: uunet!gator!larry
Newsgroups: comp.mail.sendmail
From: rickert@mp.cs.niu.edu (Neil Rickert)
Subject: Re: sendmail/IDA startup problem Help wanted.
Organization: Northern Illinois University
Date: Sat, 12 Sep 1992 02:08:57 GMT

In article <BuFqvC.2sF@Sweden.Prime.COM> hakan@Sweden.Prime.COM (Hakan Sjogren) writes:
>
>I then started the process by sendmail -bd -q15m .
>Sendmail never starts, the process list has an entry
>"waiting for connection" . 

I am not sure what your problem is.  Sendmail is supposed to be waiting for
a connection.  Try 'ps -cax' to list command names rather than the command
line, or recompile without SETPROCTITLE is seeing the "waiting for connection"
message disturbs you.

You can also check whether the daemon is running with
	telnet localhost smtp
	quit

Newsgroups: comp.mail.sendmail
From: woods@claven.ucar.edu (Greg Woods)
Subject: Re: Replacing UUCP with SMTP in this age...
Organization: Scientific Computing Division/NCAR Boulder, CO
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1992 16:37:54 GMT

In article <1992Sep10.153316.17758@nmrdc1.nmrdc.nnmc.navy.mil> rdc30@nmrdc1.nmrdc.nnmc.navy.mil (Code-03 LCDR Michael E. Dobson) writes:

>Another option is the use of POP clients and servers.  We do that here,
>especially for DOS users, over SLIP.  This does require an account for each
>user on the server

Well, if you want to use POP right out of the bag, yes, but I hacked the
Berkeley POP3 server without too much trouble to use an auxiliary password
file for authenticating users, along with a trivial script to deliver mail
for such users, so that only a mailbox on the server (and a special "pop"
user) is required on the server.

> and doesn't help for dial-up machines with multiple users.

I'm not sure I follow this one. The POP servers that I have seen require
a user name and password to be entered (with or without the above hack)
regardless of who the connecting host is. I don't see why you shouldn't
be able to access multiple POP mailboxes from the same client host.

--Greg
From: huntting@advtech.uswest.com
Newsgroups: comp.mail.sendmail
Subject: Re: Replacing UUCP with SMTP in this age...
Date: 15 Sep 92 01:06:25 GMT
Reply-To: huntting@advtech.uswest.com
Organization: U S WEST Advanced Technologies
Originator: huntting@futureworld

In article <1992Sep10.104710.8787@visionware.co.uk> chris@visionware.co.uk (Chris Davies) writes:
>ckd@eff.org (Christopher Davis) writes:
>Assuming your client is prepared to issue commands after connection, a
>more transparent (to the server) hack is to execute the command
>"/usr/lib/sendmail -q" on the server - it forces a queue run to deliver
>any email to hosts that are now reachable.

On servers running IDA or Sun's sendmail, the -Rremote.machine.name
flag will work better.  Normally this can only be done by root, but
that can be easily fixed in sendmail.

However there is another consideration, smtp chit chat doesn't use
bandwidth very efficiantly.  For sites where modems are a scarce
resource, or users who are calling longdistance, it would help to
streamline the process.

Running the queue in parallel might help some.  However this can really
swamp a smaller machine.

As for the TURN command, the potential security (being able to snag
someone elses mail) holes are probably why it was never implemented.


brad
Xref: sparky comp.mail.sendmail:2225 comp.mail.uucp:1776