Professional Web Applications Themes

sendmail, smart host, no undeliverable notifications - SCO

I have recently set up outgoing email on a clients 5.0.6 box with sendmail (sco's sendamil) Originally, it sent mail directly, but we soon discovered that several large important domains reject mail from certain ip addresses (aol/earthlink/etc reject smtp from dialup/dsl/cable addresses) So I changed sendmail to use the isp's (comcast) smart-host. Fine now mail goes out and is received everywhere. Now however, undeliverable mails are not generating notifications to root, or any other form of notification I can find. The customer very strongly wants to be notified when an attempted outgoing email fails for whatever reason. I educated them ...

  1. #1

    Default sendmail, smart host, no undeliverable notifications

    I have recently set up outgoing email on a clients 5.0.6 box with
    sendmail (sco's sendamil)

    Originally, it sent mail directly, but we soon discovered that several
    large important domains reject mail from certain ip addresses
    (aol/earthlink/etc reject smtp from dialup/dsl/cable addresses)

    So I changed sendmail to use the isp's (comcast) smart-host.

    Fine now mail goes out and is received everywhere.

    Now however, undeliverable mails are not generating notifications to
    root, or any other form of notification I can find.

    The customer very strongly wants to be notified when an attempted
    outgoing email fails for whatever reason. I educated them that this is
    never 100% possible, since many isps just drop undeliverable stuff on
    the floor, no feedback. But still, usually there is feedback, because
    when the server sends the mail directly, several such notifications
    appear in root's mail box regularly. They just want that back.

    I've been googling around but I'm at a loss.
    Brian Guest

  2. #2

    Default Re: sendmail, smart host, no undeliverable notifications


    <snips throughout for brevity>

    On 2 Oct 2003, Jean-Pierre Radley wrote:
     

    But that would be because there *aren't* many undeliverables. All
    your MTA can tell you is what the next MTA it connects to tells it.
    If your ISP's MTA is accepting the mail from you (via the SmartHost
    directive), you're not going to get many errors.

    The only undeliverable messages you should get should be the ones
    generated by the authoritative destination SMTP server, and those
    messages would be delivered to the envelope "From: " header of the
    individual message, not to postmaster or root.
     

    Change ISPs to one that doesn't use IP addresses for business customers
    that appear on RBLs and DULs. That's seriously your only choice. That
    way you could drop SmartHost and be a "real" SMTP server.
     

    I could list at least a dozen reasons here for using sendmail, but the
    only one really needed is at http://www.sbay.org/smail-faq.html

    JS

    John Guest

  3. #3

    Default Re: sendmail, smart host, no undeliverable notifications

    Brian K. White typed (on Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 03:27:27PM -0700):
    | I have recently set up outgoing email on a clients 5.0.6 box with
    | sendmail (sco's sendamil)
    |
    | Originally, it sent mail directly, but we soon discovered that several
    | large important domains reject mail from certain ip addresses
    | (aol/earthlink/etc reject smtp from dialup/dsl/cable addresses)
    |
    | So I changed sendmail to use the isp's (comcast) smart-host.
    |
    | Fine now mail goes out and is received everywhere.
    |
    | Now however, undeliverable mails are not generating notifications to
    | root, or any other form of notification I can find.
    |
    | The customer very strongly wants to be notified when an attempted
    | outgoing email fails for whatever reason. I educated them that this is
    | never 100% possible, since many isps just drop undeliverable stuff on
    | the floor, no feedback. But still, usually there is feedback, because
    | when the server sends the mail directly, several such notifications
    | appear in root's mail box regularly. They just want that back.
    |
    | I've been googling around but I'm at a loss.

    Why do you insist on using sendmail?
    I live rather blissfully. using smail...


    --
    JP
    Jean-Pierre Guest

  4. #4

    Default Re: sendmail, smart host, no undeliverable notifications Reply-To: scomscxenitec.on.ca

    Brian K. White enscribed:
    | I have recently set up outgoing email on a clients 5.0.6 box with
    | sendmail (sco's sendamil)
    |
    | Originally, it sent mail directly, but we soon discovered that several
    | large important domains reject mail from certain ip addresses
    | (aol/earthlink/etc reject smtp from dialup/dsl/cable addresses)
    |
    | So I changed sendmail to use the isp's (comcast) smart-host.
    |
    | Fine now mail goes out and is received everywhere.
    |
    | Now however, undeliverable mails are not generating notifications to
    | root, or any other form of notification I can find.
    |
    | The customer very strongly wants to be notified when an attempted
    | outgoing email fails for whatever reason. I educated them that this is
    | never 100% possible, since many isps just drop undeliverable stuff on
    | the floor, no feedback. But still, usually there is feedback, because
    | when the server sends the mail directly, several such notifications
    | appear in root's mail box regularly. They just want that back.
    |
    | I've been googling around but I'm at a loss.

    Are you getting caught in the Verisign trap?

    They added a wildcard A record for .com and .net domains making every
    conceivable .com and .net domain name appear to exist. When mail is
    addressed to a non-existent domain, instead of it never leaving the
    local machine and being returned quickly, the mail is going to
    a Verisign server and eventually (hopefully) they will return it.
    --
    ================================================== ========================
    Tom Parsons com
    ================================================== ========================
    Tom Guest

  5. #5

    Default Re: sendmail, smart host, no undeliverable notifications

    In article <google.com>,
    Brian K. White <com> wrote: 
     
     

    Well you don't have to be all-or-nothing, which is what happens
    when you set up smart host vs directly yourself.

    I set up the domains for which I can not send mail directly in
    mailertable, and let my server handle all the others. This way the
    only ones you'll miss being notified are the ones that are going
    through the smart host set.

    If your mails get bounced at the far side when using SmartHost
    they got back to the SmartHost. Maybe you can convince them so
    bounce them back to you. Unless you have a user friendly service
    friendly ISP that probably won't happen.

    Bill
    --
    Bill Vermillion - bv wjv . com
    Bill Guest

  6. #6

    Default Re: sendmail, smart host, no undeliverable notifications

    Brian K. White wrote (on Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 03:27:27PM -0700): 

    ^^ Problem A ^^
     

    My solution when I had this problem (Problem A) was to have the ISP reverse-map
    my IP to a descriptive name. The (one) customer that blocked me did so based on
    "ppp" appearing in my host name's PTR record.

    NYZ

    --
    _________________________________________
    Nachman Yaakov Ziskind, EA, LLM com
    Attorney and Counselor-at-Law http://ziskind.us
    Economic Group Pension Services http://egps.com
    Actuaries and Employee Benefit Consultants
    Nachman Guest

  7. #7

    Default Re: sendmail, smart host, no undeliverable notifications

    Jean-Pierre Radley <com> wrote in message news:<jpr.com>... 


    Since I had never before touched sendmail except fleetingly on linux
    boxes, I was primed and spring-loaded to yank it and drop in smail
    from your site. My largest customer, whose machine sends a lot of
    email, is running smail at your suggestion when mmdf was taking too
    much resources, and it has been very well-behaved ever since.

    However, the customer already had sendmail and they are not a direct
    customer of mine, so I try not to be unneccessarily invasive. Their
    consultant merely contracted me to add print-to-pdf-email-attachement
    to their filepro app, and that entailed getting their outgoing email
    up & running. It turned out not to be at all difficult to get it going
    in the most basic sense, just getting direct outbound working, and
    then switching to using a smart host. I never touched sendmail.cf,
    just used scoadmin.

    If you can tell me:
    how to specify a smart host (i'm sure that's already in the docs)
    and
    how to receive non-delivery notifications from the smart host
    I have 0 problem switching them. (and *they* certainly don't care)

    Are you suggesting maybe it "just works" without having to do anything
    special?
    Or do you already know first hand that it works? In which case I'll
    switch them,
    And if they still don't receive the notices, then maybe it's because
    of comcasts mail server, in which case I'm not sure what can be done
    about it other than maybe subscribing to a service where they could
    use some other box as a smart host that acts better. ?

    Thanks.
    Brian Guest

  8. #8

    Default Re: sendmail, smart host, no undeliverable notifications

    On 2 Oct 2003, Brian K. White wrote:
     

    You might want to look at other alternatives, such as Postfix. Postfix is
    easy to configure and well doented. There are more alternatives also.

    Joe Guest

  9. #9

    Default Re: sendmail, smart host, no undeliverable notifications

    On Fri, Oct 03, 2003, Joe Dunning wrote: 
    >
    >You might want to look at other alternatives, such as Postfix. Postfix is
    >easy to configure and well doented. There are more alternatives also.[/ref]

    smail-3.2 is OK, and we used it for over ten years (and still do where uucp
    is a major requirement). We moved most of our systems to Postfix a year or
    so ago, largely because it has far better anti-spam capabilities, and is
    more efficient on larger systems.

    Bill
    --
    INTERNET: COM Bill Campbell; Celestial Systems, Inc.
    UUCP: camco!bill PO Box 820; 6641 E. Mercer Way
    FAX: (206) 232-9186 Mercer Island, WA 98040-0820; (206) 236-1676
    URL: http://www.celestial.com/

    If you want government to intervene domestially, you're a liberal. If you
    want government to intervene overseas, you're a conservative. If you want
    government to intervene everywhere, you're a moderate. If you don't want
    government to intervene anywhare, you're an extermist -- Joseph Sobran
    Bill Guest

  10. #10

    Default Re: sendmail, smart host, no undeliverable notifications

    Brian K. White typed (on Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 08:41:28PM -0700):
    | Jean-Pierre Radley <com> wrote in message news:<jpr.com>...
    | > Brian K. White typed (on Thu, Oct 02, 2003 at 03:27:27PM -0700):
    | > | I have recently set up outgoing email on a clients 5.0.6 box with
    | > | sendmail (sco's sendamil)
    | > |
    | > | Originally, it sent mail directly, but we soon discovered that several
    | > | large important domains reject mail from certain ip addresses
    | > | (aol/earthlink/etc reject smtp from dialup/dsl/cable addresses)
    | > |
    | > | So I changed sendmail to use the isp's (comcast) smart-host.
    | > |
    | > | Fine now mail goes out and is received everywhere.
    | > |
    | > | Now however, undeliverable mails are not generating notifications to
    | > | root, or any other form of notification I can find.
    | > |
    | > | The customer very strongly wants to be notified when an attempted
    | > | outgoing email fails for whatever reason. I educated them that this is
    | > | never 100% possible, since many isps just drop undeliverable stuff on
    | > | the floor, no feedback. But still, usually there is feedback, because
    | > | when the server sends the mail directly, several such notifications
    | > | appear in root's mail box regularly. They just want that back.
    | > |
    | > | I've been googling around but I'm at a loss.
    | >
    | > Why do you insist on using sendmail?
    | > I live rather blissfully. using smail...
    |
    |
    | Since I had never before touched sendmail except fleetingly on linux
    | boxes, I was primed and spring-loaded to yank it and drop in smail
    | from your site. My largest customer, whose machine sends a lot of
    | email, is running smail at your suggestion when mmdf was taking too
    | much resources, and it has been very well-behaved ever since.
    |
    | However, the customer already had sendmail and they are not a direct
    | customer of mine, so I try not to be unneccessarily invasive. Their
    | consultant merely contracted me to add print-to-pdf-email-attachement
    | to their filepro app, and that entailed getting their outgoing email
    | up & running. It turned out not to be at all difficult to get it going
    | in the most basic sense, just getting direct outbound working, and
    | then switching to using a smart host. I never touched sendmail.cf,
    | just used scoadmin.
    |
    | If you can tell me:
    | how to specify a smart host (i'm sure that's already in the docs)

    Yes, see smart-path in the smailconf man page.

    | and
    | how to receive non-delivery notifications from the smart host

    I can't imagine why errors would not come back to the sender, but
    you might consider including an "Errors-To:" header in all outgoing mail.

    | I have 0 problem switching them. (and *they* certainly don't care)
    |
    | Are you suggesting maybe it "just works" without having to do anything
    | special?
    | Or do you already know first hand that it works? In which case I'll
    | switch them,
    | And if they still don't receive the notices, then maybe it's because
    | of comcasts mail server, in which case I'm not sure what can be done
    | about it other than maybe subscribing to a service where they could
    | use some other box as a smart host that acts better. ?
    |
    | Thanks.

    --
    JP
    Jean-Pierre Guest

  11. #11

    Default Re: sendmail, smart host, no undeliverable notifications

    On Fri, Oct 03, 2003 at 05:21:46AM +0000, Bill Campbell wrote: 
    > >
    > >You might want to look at other alternatives, such as Postfix. Postfix is
    > >easy to configure and well doented. There are more alternatives also.[/ref]
    >
    > smail-3.2 is OK, and we used it for over ten years (and still do where uucp
    > is a major requirement). We moved most of our systems to Postfix a year or
    > so ago, largely because it has far better anti-spam capabilities, and is
    > more efficient on larger systems.[/ref]

    have you compiled Postfix for SCO? I've been switching linux boxes from
    sendmail to postfix just because its easier to config.

    a former worker here turned me on to exim, which i like the best, but it
    does not seem as popular as other MTA's, not sure why. it is designed as
    a drop-in replacement for sendmail, which makes it easy to install.

    speaking of small followings, i wonder why sco continues to push
    MMDF when it has such a small following and the config tools sco
    provides are in a few places broken (for years) anyway - it is also
    more difficult to integrate spam and antivirus solutions to at the
    server (not per-user) level than other MTA's.

    --- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ---
    -Joe Chasan- Magnatech Business Systems, Inc.
    com Hicksville, NY - USA
    http://www.MagnatechOnline.com Tel.(516) 931-4444/Fax.(516) 931-1264
    Joe Guest

  12. Moderated Post

    Default Re: sendmail, smart host, no undeliverable notifications

    Removed by Administrator
    Gary Guest
    Moderated Post

Similar Threads

  1. What happens to Undeliverable Mail
    By Nuclear.Kitten in forum Coldfusion Server Administration
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: July 1st, 04:21 PM
  2. Undeliverable email when sending to group
    By hecsan in forum Coldfusion - Getting Started
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: July 15th, 04:18 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139