Pete McEvoy wrote: > On Sat, Mar 15, 2008 at 10:11:08AM +0000, W B Hacker wrote: >> Pete McEvoy wrote: >>> On Sat, Mar 15, 2008 at 04:34:39AM +0000, W B Hacker wrote: >>>> If you have significant traffic from a specific host that commonly fails >>>> or times-out on DNS lookup, AND you otherwise feel you can 'trust' it, >>>> you can manually enter it in /etc/hosts, which is (normally) checked >>>> before making a (remote) DNS query. >>> This isnt the case on any of the linux boxes I run exim on, exim does a >>> MX lookup first. >> That part is expected. > > Doesnt that contradict your previous statement?
"DOTS" (Depends On The Situation) E.G. - used in Win NT (hosts.sam altered), Warp 3 & 4, FreeBSD 4 thru 8, OpenBSD, OS X.... yadda ... I've never tried it in Linux... > >>> In fact I cant get it to look in /etc/hosts at all. >> Not a Linux mavin here, but what does 'route -n show' produce? > > The help for route, the version of route I have doesnt seem to like > `show' , route -n prints the routing table, which isnt too exotic on any > of my boxes, fairly standard stuff. Where does that come into it? AFAIK (again 'DOTS') whatever serves a given environment for the route daemon may look externally first, internally first, or be configurable to do one or the other. Most of what I use in a given day looks locally first, e.g. mapping ads.doubleclick~, google-anal~ and similar vermin to localhost in /etc/hosts intercepts the callouts to DNS and saves dld'ing garbage, wasting time logging the sweat-stains, etc. > Not to > be adversarial, you seem a nice chap and you've answered questions from > me in the past, albeit in a meta syntactic way that I found hard to > grasp at the time but have since learned to be sound. > LOL .. guilty as charged... > I suspect Im still feeling the effects of last nights binge drinking, so > feel free to hit me with the cluebat if Im missing something obvious. > Only if you were putting dirty water - frozen or otherwise - into good malt - but that's what leads to hangovers, so is its own punishment.. > Cheers > 'missing' is that *hopefully* the OS handles routes and does some caching ahead of Exim. I could be wrong - and seem to be - for Linux. At least OpenBSD allows setting the priority - just happened to be working in that very area last night. FreeBSD and Linux may do as well - I've just not needed to look. Bill -- ## List details at http://lists.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users ## Exim details at http://www.exim.org/ ## Please use the Wiki with this list - http://wiki.exim.org/
