[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: sendmail 8.11.0.Beta1-1



On Tue, Jun 06, 2000 at 08:04:53PM +0200, Jaume Teixi wrote:
> Thank you, but my problem is the following:
> 
> I've correctly setup /usr/lib/sasl/Sendmail.conf
> /usr/lib/sasl/saslpasswd.conf
> 
> I need some help on howto generate /etc/sasldb throught saslpasswd, which
> user need to setup ? mail ? sendmail ?

All you need is /usr/lib/sasl/Sendmail.conf. You should tell it what
to authenticate against. I'm using pam, so my Sendmail.conf just
says:  
pwcheck_method:PAM

My /etc/pam.d/smtp file says:
#%PAM-1.0
auth       sufficient   /lib/security/pam_ldap.so
auth       required     /lib/security/pam_unix_auth.so try_first_pass
account    sufficient   /lib/security/pam_ldap.so
account    required     /lib/security/pam_unix_acct.so


Remember, I'm primairly authenticating my ldap users. It defaults to 
/etc/sasldb. To create the file, as root run "./saslpasswd -c username"
to create the first user. After that you wont need the -c. 

Assuming you've compiled sendmail correctly, you need to tell sendmail
what authentication mechanisms are available. Netscape and OE use 
LOGIN and PLAIN. By default, sasl doesnt support PLAIN. You need to
configure it specificaly when you compile it (./configure --with-login).
At least I did.

> And I need to define an authid ? howto ?
> I only need SMTP AUTH running for allowing users to relay until get
> authenticated under /etc/passwd
> 
> I'm following http://www.sendmail.org/~ca/email/cyrus/sysadmin.html
> and http://www.sendmail.org/~ca/email/auth.html
> but I'm still confused

You'll also need to tell sendmail what auth mechanisms to use. Have a 
look here to see what most mail clients support:
http://www.sendmail.org/~ca/email/mel/SASL_ClientRef.html

--
Mental

I'm new and improved!  Now with added flavor!
Common side effects included stroke, ugliness, myocardial infarction, 
itchy itchy rash, and death.
 
GPG 1.0.1 Public Key: http://www.neverlight.com/mental-gpg.asc



Reply to: