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

Re: sendmail stuff?



If my .02 matters, I would have to agree with Toomas, relaxing the default
might not be a good idea. Maybe some mention somewhere in the FAQ about
which services are wrapped (such as a tcp_wrappers portion of the FAQ)
would be a better idea.

--jim--

On Wed, 1 Dec 1999, Toomas Kiisk wrote:

> 
> 
> On Tue, 30 Nov 1999, chuck wrote:
> 
> > Quoting Dave Brooks (dbrooks_(_at_)_elysium_(_dot_)_comstar_(_dot_)_net):
> > > Wow, surprisingly, this fixed everything.
> > surpringly?
> > 
> > Perhaps, once the 2.6 freeze is over (Todd), perhaps we should
> > remove the TCP_WRAPPER support from sendmail. I dunno. I use the
> > access.db file to handle who gets access or not. It becomes a
> > single point of contact for most of the sendmail stuff.
> > Perhaps, not, I can see why we might want the gross controls for
> > very basic setups.
> > 
> 
> sendmail_flags="-q30m -OLibwrap=No"
> or smth. similar would be much better idea. Relaxing defaults
> isn't good thing.
> 
> 
> 




Visit your host, monkey.org