HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: fitz@wang.com (Tom Fitzgerald)
Subject: Re: IDA and NO_WILDCARD_MX
Organization: Wang Labs, Lowell MA, USA
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 92 00:53:39 GMT

barr@pop.psu.edu (David Barr) writes:

> I make no special tricks or hacks to allow people to use unqualified
> addresses.  If someone sends mail from here to "bob@math", (expecting
> it to be delivered to "math.psu.edu")  IMHO it _should_ always bounce.

Maybe 8-character suffixes are just under some subtle ergonomic limit, but
it drives me nuts having to append ".wang.com" to addresses unnecessarily.
I suspect that the nice people at lehrstuhl-bross.physik.uni-muenchen.de
would feel even more strongly about it.

> ... a problem at one of this campus's primary mail hubs.  They run
> ZMailer, which has the broken behavior of doing recursive DNS queries.
> I tried to send mail to "user@omega.UUCP".  Unfortunately, they have a
> local machine called "omega", and it promptly tried delievering it
> there.  :-( 

That's not just broken because it did recursive queries - do you mean that
it discarded the ".UUCP" that you specified?  That's what should be fixed.
Mailers should _never_ discard a user-specified domain.

> To boil it down, I try to get my users into the habit of always using
> fully qualified addresses.  Those few extra characters save me lots of
> headaches, and the users a lot less bounced mail.

I don't see any problems with automatically qualifying single-token
addresses here (if I could get it to happen consistently).  Mail addressed
to site.UUCP is correctly forwarded to our UUCP gateway.  People who try
to use single-token addresses outside the local domain (which are usually
addresses received from BITNET users who aren't aware of DNS or anything
outside BITNET) will get a bounce; but failing to qualify local addresses
wouldn't change that.

-- 
Tom Fitzgerald   Wang Labs       fitz@wang.com   "I went to the universe today;
1-508-967-5278   Lowell MA, USA                   It was closed...."

Newsgroups: comp.mail.sendmail
From: kenh@leps5.phys.psu.edu (Ken Hornstein)
Subject: IDA sendmail - will not autorebuild aliases file
Organization: Penn State, Laboratory for Elementary Particle Science
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 04:03:56 GMT

I am trying to get IDA sendmail to autorebuild the aliases file.  If I set
the autorebuild flag, I get "DBM store failed: not owner".  /etc/aliases 
is owned by root, /etc/aliases.* are owned by root and has mode 666.  It works
fine if I use "newaliases".  What am I doing wrong?

(Oh, this fails on both Ultrix 4.0 on a DECstation 3100 and BSD 4.3 on a 
VAX 11/750)

--Ken
From: bruce@blilly.UUCP (Bruce Lilly)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.sendmail
Subject: Re: setting mailer userid
Date: 12 Oct 92 17:08:33 GMT
Organization: Bruce Lilly

In article <1992Oct9.215652.10019@cirrus.com> dhesi@cirrus.com (Rahul Dhesi) wrote:
>
>So I found this alternate solution:
>
>	Mxyz_mailer, P=/local/undoc/setuid, F=DFMSrmnus, 
>		R=25/10, S=10, A=setuid joe /home/joe/xyz_mailer $u

Looks a lot like:

	Mxyz_mailer, P=/bin/su, F=DFMSrmnus, 
		R=25/10, S=10, A=su joe -c "/home/joe/xyz_mailer $u"

Why reinvent /bin/su using perl?
-- 
	Bruce Lilly		blilly!bruce@Broadcast.Sony.COM
					...uunet!sonyusa!sonyd1!blilly!bruce
Newsgroups: comp.mail.sendmail
From: bruce@blilly.UUCP (Bruce Lilly)
Subject: Re: sendmail.cf question...
Organization: Bruce Lilly
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 92 23:04:03 GMT
Distribution: usa

In article <1992Oct5.175815.18093@Princeton.EDU> amlovell@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Anthony M Lovell) wrote:
>
>My machine is a NeXT named optic.
>My mail server (in my local world here) is an SVR 4.2 box named fiber.
>We have internet access thru uupsi (some corporate service).
>
>[...] but messages I send
>reach the addressee with a return address of optic!tony@uu3.psi.com.
>
>People replying to these messages get thwarted because uupsi only knows
>about fiber and the wildfire.com addresses.  How can I amend the
>sendmail.cf files on optic and fiber so the outside world gets a nice,
>simple, pretty picture of our configuration?

With a text editor...

Seriously, though, a little bit more information about your
configuration is required. E.g.:
	what version of sendmail is being run on the Next?
		is it the one that came standard with the
		hardware, or was it added later?
	is the ``SVR 4.2 box named fiber'' *really* running
		sendmail? (sendmail is not normally provided as
		the mail transfer agent on SVRanything systems)
		If so, what version?
	what mail user agent is being used on the Next box? what
		version?
	how is mail transferred between the various machines
		(presumably UUCP/rmail to uupsi, but what about
		between your local machines)?
	what do the mail headers look like?:
		1)	on the Next box
		2)	when they arrive at the SVR4.2 box
		3)	when they leave the SVR4.2 box
	ditto for the ``envelope'' addresses
	are your local machines part of the ``wildfire.com''
		domain (you gave only unqualified host names)?
		(BTW, your article had a header containing the
		address "news@nimaster", which is another
		example of an unqualified host name leaking into
		the World At Large.)

Lacking the above information, only a few generalizations can be
given:
	*If* the header(s) (*and* envelope addresses) of the
	messages as they are generated on the Next box contain
	fully-qualified domain addresses (e.g.
	tony@optic.wildfire.com) it is probably a relatively
	simple matter (depending on the type and version of MTA)
	to "hide" the local host names before the message leaves
	your domain (i.e. when it is sent to uupsi), so that it
	becomes "tony@wildfire.com". If not, then the SVR4.2 box
	needs to be able to distinguish *your* "optic" from any
	other "optic" that might exist, and either append
	".wildfire.com" or substitute the latter for the former
	(making any necessary syntactic translations as well).
	The details of the modifications of course depend on the
	details of your configuration.

-- 
	Bruce Lilly		blilly!bruce@Broadcast.Sony.COM
					...uunet!sonyusa!sonyd1!blilly!bruce
Newsgroups: comp.mail.sendmail,comp.mail.uucp
From: herrera@athena.mit.edu (Ramon F Herrera)
Subject: Rewriting domain addresses to UUCP addresses
Summary: How to do it? 
Keywords: UUCP domain rewrite 
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 03:52:22 GMT


I would like to be able to re-map addresses from the
domain notation to the UUCP notation. That is, any mail
addressed to:

        user@subdom.domain

Should be sent to

        subdom!user

I am sure this involves modifying the sendmail.cf file,
but, how can I do that specifically?

thanks for your help,

-Ramon Herrera
Newsgroups: comp.mail.sendmail
From: alexis@panix.com (Alexis Rosen)
Subject: Re: setting mailer userid
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 11:03:07 GMT
Organization: PANIX Public Access Unix, NYC

In <rhoward.718474180@matd> rhoward@matd.gatech.edu (Robert L. Howard) writes:
>If I start sendmail as superuser by doing a 'su' after first logging
>on as myself, sendmail somehow figures out that I was behind it and
>tends to put my RealName in ()'s on all From: lines.  The only way
>to avoid this is to actually *log in* as root (which I can't do
>via remote telnet for security reasons).  It's a lot of walking
>to restart all those sendmails whenever I redo my .m4 files for
>some reason....

>What should I do so this won't happen?

Make a script to do it. su to root. "at now+1min <script"...

--
Alexis Rosen   Owner/Sysadmin,
PANIX Public Access Unix & Internet, NYC.
alexis@panix.com
{uupsi,cmcl2}!panix!alexis
From: rickert@mp.cs.niu.edu (Neil Rickert)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.sendmail
Subject: Re: IDA and NO_WILDCARD_MX
Date: 13 Oct 92 02:39:27 GMT
Article-I.D.: mp.1992Oct13.023927.7026
Organization: Northern Illinois University

In article <bw1ell.4of@wang.com> fitz@wang.com (Tom Fitzgerald) writes:
>
>So, if other people are running with NO_WILDCARD_MX undefined, is there
>another way you use to canonicalize single-token MX-only subdomains?  Or
>are you all just in the habit of typing fully qualified names even in your
>local domains?

I recommend DOMAINTABLE for this purpose.
Newsgroups: comp.mail.sendmail
From: krobinso@encore.com (Kristine Robinson)
Subject: sendmail 5.67 alias problem (yellowpages)
Organization: Encore Computer Corporation
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 12:58:57 GMT
Summary: some aliases undefined for yp users
Keywords: sendmail 5.67 ida


I am debugging a sendmail 5.67 alias problem on a yellowpages network.  The
problem is that some aliases don't work if your passwd entry is in
/etc/yp/src/passwd.  These same aliases do work if your passwd entry is in
/etc/passwd.  The aliases work for everyone if the frozen config file is
removed (ie: sendmail reparses the config file every time).

This is what the yp user gets with the frozen config file:
/usr/lib/sendmail -bv itlist
itlist... User unknown

This is what the /etc/passwd user gets:
/usr/lib/sendmail -v -bv -m itlist
itlist... aliased to  rdf,marc,edh,steve,axk,bess,julie
julie... deliverable
bess... deliverable
axk... deliverable
steve... deliverable
edh... deliverable
marc... deliverable
rdf... deliverable

Any ideas?  Is it sendmail (freeze/thaw routines)?  Is it the yp aliases
database?  Can we modify the sendmail.cf file or hack the sendmail.fc file
to work around the problem?

please reply to: krobinso@encore.com

thanks in advance
-kristine
Newsgroups: comp.mail.sendmail,comp.mail.uucp
From: avolio@dco.DEC.COM (Frederick M. Avolio)
Subject: Re: Rewriting domain addresses to UUCP addresses
Keywords: UUCP domain rewrite 
Reply-To: avolio@dco.DEC.COM (Frederick M. Avolio)
Organization: Digital Equipment Corp., Washington ULTRIX Resource Center
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 14:09:39 GMT


Should be done in UUCP rewriting rules and you should NOT strip off
any domain info unless it is your own site (ie, user@decuac.dec.com becoming
decuac!user)

f
Newsgroups: comp.mail.sendmail
From: pinesoft@netcom.com (Pine Software)
Subject: Re: Wanted: PC Windows Email for Unix mail
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 00:42:42 GMT

In article <1992Oct12.040500.15573@iti.gov.sg> jinho@iti.gov.sg (Tan Jin Ho) writes:
>
>I am looking for an MS Windows-based Email application program that runs on
>top of standard PC TCP/IP networks and uses SMTP and/or POP. (ie. it can
>read and send UNIX mail).
>
>Any pointers would be greatly appreciated.
>
>
>Tan Jin Ho
>jinho@iti.gov.sg
>

You recently requested information about Pine Software's e-mail
product, I have included an announcement of Open Systems Mail(TM).
Out product currently supports the following TCP/IP products,
Sun's PCNFS, FTP's PC-TCP, Wollongong's Pathways, and Novell's LAN
Workplace for DOS.  Support for additional TCP/IP stacks is being
added.

PINE SOFTWARE
PO Box 3041 Stanford, CA  94309
(415) 962-8687 e-mail, pinesoft@netcom.com (Internet) 

Pine Software, Inc. is pleased to introduce Open Systems Mail(TM) 
for Microsoft(TM) Windows(TM).  Open Systems Mail is a fully 
featured, easy-to-use electronic mail application designed or IBM 
PCs and compatibles running Microsoft Windows/DOS-based TCP/IP 
client protocols.  This product is one of the only electronic mail 
products for MS Windows that truly conforms to open systems and 
standards (SMTP, TCP/IP, RFCs).


The following is a list of  planned future enhancements:


    - Program icon will indicate arrival of new mail while minimized

    - Tool and status bar for improved functionality and ease-of-use

    - Allow user to send and receive binary attachments in accordance
      with MIME specification

    - Improved performance for all message and folder operations

    - A new version designed for use with portable computers and modems

    - A Macintosh equivalent for MacTCP

Open Systems Mail_ is available now, directly from Pine Software.  
Please contact us for more information.
Newsgroups: comp.mail.sendmail
From: scott@statsci.com (Scott Blachowicz)
Subject: Re: UUCP addresses forwarded to mailserver
Reply-To: scott@statsci.com
Organization: Statistical Sciences, Inc., Seattle, WA USA
	<1992Oct7.142540.28541@kocrsv01.delcoelect.com>
	<1992Oct8.012124.9536@cognos.com>
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 16:54:51 GMT

>>>>> "Max" == Max Maklin <maklinm@cognos.com>

 Max> In article <1992Oct7.142540.28541@kocrsv01.delcoelect.com> swlodin@kocrsv01.delcoelect.com (Steve Lodin) writes:
 Max> :^()  
 Max> :^()  Well, the line in the HP sendmail config file that is the culprit is:
 Max> :^()  
 Max> :^()  # pass unresolved UUCP addresses to the UUCP relay (via SMTP)
 Max> :^()  R$+<@$+.UUX>            $#tcp$@$W$:$1<@$2.UUX>  to UUCP relay via SMTP
 Max> :^()  
 Max> :^()  
 Max> :^()  I just changed it to pass the address with .UUCP instead of .UUX
 Max> :^()  
 Max> :^()  # pass unresolved UUCP addresses to the UUCP relay (via SMTP)
 Max> :^()  R$+<@$+.UUX>            $#tcp$@$W$:$1<@$2.UUCP> to UUCP relay via SMTP
 Max> :^()  

 Max> OK, so what the heck is .UUX and why is HP shipping that in their default
 Max> snedmail configs?
I believe that .UUX is the "domain name" that the sendmail.cf file uses as a
temporary way of flagging bang path addresses. In canonicalizing the address
something like "foo!bar" would get transformed to "bar<@foo.UUX>" for purposes
of determining routing and such. It should get transformed back out when it is
done with it.

Maybe your tcp mailer isn't expecting .UUX style addresses. The sendmail.cf
on one of our HP's (HP9000/720 HPUX 8.05) has this for the tcp mailer:
    Mtcp,  P=[IPC],  F=CDFMXmu,  S=11,  R=21,  E=\r\n,  A=IPC $h

    S11
    R$*<@$+.UUX>    $@$2!$1<@$w>        add local domain to UUCP address
    R<@$+>:$*       $@<@$w>:@$1:$2      add local domain to source route
    R$+<@$+>        $@$1<@$2>           already has domain
    R$+             $:$1<@$?Y$Y$|$w$.>  add local domain

    S21
    R$*<@$+>$*      $@$1<@$2>$3         already has domain
    R$+             $:$1<@$w>           add local domain
which looks like it doesn't deal with the .UUX transformation in the recipient
address rewriting rule (R=21 ==> S21). So it seems that one of these ought to
be reasonable:
    -don't give .UUX addresses to Mtcp
    -add a rule to S21 to transform the .UUX addresses:
        R$*<@$+.UUX>$*  $1<@$2.UUCP>$3

--
Scott Blachowicz    Ph: 206/283-8802x240      USPS:  Statistical Sciences, Inc
                                                      1700 Westlake Ave N #500
scott@statsci.com / uunet!statsci!scott                Seattle, WA USA   98109
..or..     Scott.Blachowicz@seaslug.org
Newsgroups: comp.mail.sendmail
From: rickert@mp.cs.niu.edu (Neil Rickert)
Subject: Re: Relative sender name problem
Organization: Northern Illinois University
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 04:00:35 GMT

In article <1992Oct13.171546.19551@uts.uni-c.dk> unisli@uts.uni-c.dk (Steen Linden) writes:
>My problem relates to a generic sun sendmail.main.cf configuration file
>on a SPARCstation.
>
>The $g macro used to identify the sender relative to recipient evaluates to
>sender@domain but what I want is sender@machine.domain. I don't want the 
>machine name stripped off.

This is handled in the rewrite rules, where @$m is appended to the
address in a few places.  Change these to either @$w or @$w.$m, depending
on how your mail is set u. Also I wouldn't like to replace the predefined
address in a few places.  Change these to either $w or $w.$m, depending
on how your mail is set up.

>                           Also I wouldn't like to replace the predefined
>$g macro with e.g. $u.$w since I don't want fully qualified sender names
>for mail sent locally on the machine.

Don't even think about trying this.  $g is used internally in code, and
it is assigned a value internally in code.  You cannot change this to
$u.$w without much hacking.  However the values assigned to $g do depend
on your rewrite rules in sendmail.cf

Newsgroups: comp.mail.sendmail
From: mrl@uai.com (Mark R. Ludwig)
Subject: Source of complaint about localhost != 127.0.0.1
Organization: Universal Analytics, Inc., Torrance (LA), CA
Date: 14 Oct 92 05:50:21

I installed IDA 1.4.4.1 sendmail a couple weeks ago, and I'm now
installing MH and a POP so our PCs can send and receive mail and all
our Unix users can get mail on any host without administrative
intervention.  In configuring MH, I've set "mts: sendmail/smtp"
because the docs claim this yields a superior interface.  I'm not so
sure, but before I experiment with removing the "/smtp" part, I want
to track down and eliminate a message which I get whenever I send mail
from MH.  It appears on the (SunOS 4.1.1b) console, and in
/var/adm/messages:

  Oct 13 11:28:20 sun4 sendmail[23901]: gethostbyaddr: localhost != 127.0.0.1

This message appears each and every time MH sends mail, which I assume
it is doing by connecting to the localhost SMTP port.  The result of
this message in the mail is:

  Received: from [127.0.0.1] by uai.com with SMTP id AA05278
    (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for <mrl>); Wed, 14 Oct 1992 05:43:57 -0700

I've been perusing the source, and it seems to me that this message is
not coming from sendmail at all, but from gethostbyaddr() itself.  Is
this possible?

I have been unable to reproduce the problem in a test program.  All my
attempts to resolve 127.0.0.1 yield "localhost" as expected.  I really
don't think the problem is with the definition of localhost, as such,
but I suppose anything's possible.  We do run NIS, and this _is_ a
Sun; sendmail is running with BIND and FORCE_NAMED.

Thanks in advance for any enlightenment.$$
-- 
INET: mrl@uai.com           NIC: ML255           ICBM: USA; Lower Left Coast
  "I'll have Widgettygrub soup, some Char-Grilled Yabby, Bunionnut 
   Vegetable Torte, and Waddleseed Ice Cream" -- Customer ordering Bushtucker
   (It's Australian, Mate!  Spelling corrections requested.)
From: rickert@mp.cs.niu.edu (Neil Rickert)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.sendmail
Subject: Re: Multi-user mailbox access
Date: 7 Oct 92 19:12:10 GMT
Article-I.D.: mp.1992Oct7.191210.30682
Organization: Northern Illinois University

In article <BvrL8G.6ty@cosy.sbg.ac.at> lendl@cosy.sbg.ac.at (Otmar Lendl) writes:
>In article <1992Oct2.121812.10857@progress.com> tucker@bedford.progress.COM writes:
>>
>I got similar problems.
>Here at Salyzburg univ. the group which is managing the workstations

>Well, we ran in the same difficulties as tucker@bedford, namely the
>permissions of the file. I looked in the Sendmail Operation Guide, but
>found no clues whatsoever.

Try giving the file permission 4644.  This sets the 'suid' bit, but no
execute bits.  This will make the file writeable only by the file owner
(could be daemon if you wish), but readable by everyone.  Because of the
suid bit, your sendmail will write to the file with the permissions of
the file owner.

>The way to go seems to be deliver or procmail. 

That is definitely preferred.  Direct delivery with a filename in the
aliases database does not cause any mailbox locking.  Nor does piping
it through /bin/cat with a program alias.  Deliver or procmail can
handle mailbox locking so as to avoid problems if two messages come in
at about the same time.
From: gallo@zeno.fit.edu (Michael A. Gallo)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.sendmail
Subject: Mail Forwarding Problem
Date: 16 Oct 92 21:57:00 GMT
Organization: Florida Institute of Technology

I apologize if this question has been addressed before.

Here's the picture.  I have a Sparc box with a NIS domain of +pss.fit.edu.
This machine is running sendmail.mx binary and has a "normal" sendmail.cf
file for Main Machines.  Mail originating from it is fine:  The return
address shows user@pss.fit.edu, which is what I want.  (The FQD is
galileo.pss.fit.edu.)  galileo is supposed to be the mail server for the 
pss.fit.edu subdomain.

A second machine in the pss.fit.edu domain is named kepler (FQD is 
kepler.pss.fit.edu). It has been configured as a main NIS machine with a NIS 
domain is mw.pss.fit.edu.  I had to configure it this way to get telnet, ftp, 
etc. to work.  This machine is disk equipped and The user does not want to 
remotely mount galileo's /var/spool/mail partition.  He does however want his
mail address to be user@pss.fit.edu, and wants his mail delivered directly
to his machine (kepler).  I placed an entry for this user is galileo's
/etc/aliases file to forward mail addressed to this user to his account on
kepler.  kepler is running the nomx version of sendmail, and has a client
sendmail control file.  Mail sent to this user at pss.fit.edu is accepted
by pss.fit.edu, but then generates the following error message when it tries
to forward it to user@kepler:

             . . . .

             >>> RCPT To:<wood@pss>
             554 wood@kepler... Never heard of kepler in domain pss . fit . edu
             wood@pss... Service unavailable
             >>> QUIT
           
             . . . .

I am open for suggestions.  Please mail directly to me.  Thanks.

Mike Gallo
gallo@zeno.fit.edu
From: sls@duke.cs.duke.edu (Shelley L. Shostak)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.sendmail
Subject: testing of cf files
Date: 9 Oct 92 18:57:01 GMT
Organization: Duke University Computer Science Dept.; Durham, N.C.


I am trying to use sendmail -bt (version 5.65) to "test" a cf file, but I
cannot quite get the information I seek.  This is very simple.  I would like
to see what and how it generates header lines.  I don't really care about
the recipient stuff, but I am concerned with sender info, the From: and
Return-Path: fields.  I don't really want to pick through the sources (right
now) to find this stuff out.  I have found and read some very helpful
documents (one by Neil Rickert explaining concepts and rewriting rules, and
one by Charles Hedrick with similar info).  But I cannot get the sendmail
-bt to be too helpful.  For instance, if the "C" flag is defined for a
mailer, you are SOL, because ruleset 3 strips off the domain and you cannot
get it back on before the S/R rulesets or fudging the cf file to append one
in all cases.  What is the best way to proceed?  Are there some simple
tricks I have missed?  Or should I just invoke a real sendmail with full
debugging, send a mail message, and then pick through the file?  Or should I
RTFSources?

Thanks for any help someone can provide.

Shelley

-- 
	Shelley L. Shostak			(919) 660-2565
	Computer Science Dept.			sls@duke.cs.duke.edu
	Duke University 
	Durham, N.C.      27706			
Newsgroups: comp.mail.sendmail
From: fitz@wang.com (Tom Fitzgerald)
Subject: IDA and NO_WILDCARD_MX
Organization: Beleaguered Wang Labs, Lowell MA, USA
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 92 01:53:44 GMT

The IDA 1.4.4.1 sendmail no longer has the ability to define NO_WILDCARD_MX
in conf.h.  The comments in domain.c imply that the macro was only a
performance hack that could sometimes cause problems; but what I'm seeing
is that, without the macro, some addresses aren't resolved correctly.

Specifically, with NO_WILDCARD_MX undefined, sendmail can't canonicalize an
unqualified subdomain with MX records and no A record.  Here, "$[ fnord $]"
canonicalizes to fnord.wang.com fine, because fnord has an A record and the
gethostbyname in maphostname succeeds; but "$[ wiis $]" (wiis only has MX
records) fails to canonicalize.  getcanonname is called with the single
token, the lack of NO_WILDCARD_MX blocks it from trying to qualify the
name, and the single-token name isn't found anywhere.

So, if other people are running with NO_WILDCARD_MX undefined, is there
another way you use to canonicalize single-token MX-only subdomains?  Or
are you all just in the habit of typing fully qualified names even in your
local domains?

-- 
Tom Fitzgerald   Wang Labs       fitz@wang.com   "I went to the universe today;
1-508-967-5278   Lowell MA, USA                   It was closed...."