🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1gopmdINN2s0@dayub.dayton.saic.com>, ake@dayton.saic.com (Earle Ake) writes:
> sbrant@npal.rn.com wrote:
> : -- 
> : Eh gods...
> 
> :   My feed point wants us to stop doing routing from here.  We use VMS uucp
> :   2.0.  He says that because our system is establishing routing, we are
> :   not fully using his router in the best way. He is running smtp.  
> 
> :   I am not clear as to how to establish this as if we do not have the
> :   paths database online, the uucp blows up and will not send the mail
> :   and responds with INVALID internet address.
> 
> :   I think the solution is to use the mail_rewrite rules to intercept
> :   all outbound-to addresses and to insert the routing info forcing
> :   the message to go to the router system.  I have attempted to do this
> :   and it does modify the b.xxx file and the d.xxx file remains ok with
> :   the proper @ address and uucp likes this.  But I am not certain if this
> :   really works, or is the correct method.
> 
> 	A better solution is to have a very small paths database.  Have an
> entry for your site and any you call.  Put a smart-host line pointing to your
> UUCP/SMTP neighbor.  Take out the rest of the UUCP entries.  Run the map
> build procedure and you should have a working paths file.
> 

  Yes, this will work, as I have tried it.  However, it is assuming that 
  only systems that you send mail  will be in the paths database.  This may
  not be true in many cases.  For example, if I see a listserv I wish to 
  send a note to, if it is not in the paths database, then UUCP refuses to
  send  mail to a system NOT in the paths database.  UUCP responds with
  an INVALID internet address.   So simply modifying the paths database is not
  the answer.  In fact, it looks like one needs to maintain a complete data
  base just to satisfy uucp.  Even if the mail rewrite rule changes the path
  and interceptS all outbound-to messages and routes them to the neighboring
  router.

  I have managed to get the local router, machine a, to send files to machine
  b now by using the rewrite rules, but I am having trouble getting machine
  b to route back to a.  If anyone has an example of their rewrite file that
  solves the two way problem, would you please share it here?  I have had 
  several email responses, and it seems this is more of a common problem than
  I thought.  So if you have the solution, why not share it so others my fix
  this problem.

  Thank you again and Happy Holidays!

  regards;





                                                     Steven B. Brant
________________________________________________________________________
       -->> sbrant@npal.rn.com <<--[ or ] -->> nstar!towers!npal!sbrant <<--