Re: Naming convention invalid (local) domain
On Tue, Sep 24, 2002 at 09:01:54AM +0200, Robert Ian Smit wrote:
...
> I think that would be the address rewriting rule that by default
> looks in /etc/email-addresses. I never liked it very much to have
> user stuff like that in /etc, but at the time it was the only way I
That's because it's here were user and system administrator meet:) In
the old days the mailer software would accept what ever to user put in
the From header. But too many peole misbehaved and mailed using names
of other people. So the Sender header came to be, and flags to tell
the UMA and to TMA to add it when needed. The default value for those
flags is often 'add', but you as a system administrator can change this
at will, sometimes even for specific users. But be warned, very often
this flag is used to (dis)allow other things too, like in exim the
'trusted-users' flag allows special flags to pass in the call to exim.
> knew how to have the "smarthost" at my isp accept my relay requests.
> At the time, I didn't know that the MID from my local exim would
> show up in the headers which potentially makes some people think
> less of me (i.e. borked-message-headers highlighting in mutt)
MID is Message ID?
I used to tackle this by applying a sed filter to the mail just prior
to handing it over to my uucp setup. Nowadays I don't think it's that
important anymore, many IPS's adding their own ID's in the Received
headers and all.
> Eventually I want to be independent of their mail infrastructure, but
> I don't feel opening my MTA to the outside world is a good idea for
> now.
If you just stick to sending mail out and leave the receiving wows to
your IPS I don't think you're really opening up your MTA to the
outside world. Just aslong as exim isn't listening on an outside port
you should be safe I guess (but I'm no mail and certainly no security
guru).
--
groetjes, carel
Reply to: