Hi Matthew, John, everybody :-), On Fri, Mar 31, 2006 at 01:41:37PM -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] told us: > John Rudd wrote: > > At home, where I'm behind a NAT box, I can just pick which port > > sendmail will run on, and have the NAT box direct to that port. I > > think at work, our load balancer could do something similar. > > Just in case people are listening and want to try this... > This technique is "PAT" (Port/Address Translation), which not every NAT box > can do. Make sure you get a PAT-capable box if you want to do this.
just taking this thought of DNAT (iptables jargon) a little further, one might even let sendmail run on, say port 1025, 2525, whatever, and use iptables' REDIRECT target (or whatever insert-your-favorite-os gives you similar) to redirect traffic destined for port 25 on the local box to the port sendmail is actually running on. just my 2 cents have a nice day :-) Sven > > -- > Matthew.van.Eerde (at) hbinc.com 805.964.4554 x902 > Hispanic Business Inc./HireDiversity.com Software Engineer > -- Linux zion.homelinux.com 2.6.16-mm2_30 #30 Fri Mar 31 23:23:52 CEST 2006 i686 athlon i386 GNU/Linux 00:32:45 up 6 min, 2 users, load average: 0.29, 0.57, 0.35
pgpmwje97eozQ.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ NOTE: If there is a disclaimer or other legal boilerplate in the above message, it is NULL AND VOID. You may ignore it. Visit http://www.mimedefang.org and http://www.roaringpenguin.com MIMEDefang mailing list [email protected] http://lists.roaringpenguin.com/mailman/listinfo/mimedefang
