Hi folks,
I'm looking to upgrade my site's sendmail system to qmail, but a difficulty
I'm having is providing a robust mechanism for translating 'From: ' headers
of all mail (usually incoming from network) subject to the recipient domain.
This is a site requirement; sadly, although the world-wide company mail hubs
know how to route `@ourhost.companydomain' they don't know how to do handle
our internet domain and it may not be feasible getting the other company sites
(world-wide) to fix their routing for our domain. Therefore this header
re-work is necessary (sendmail has been doing this for us for some time).
Therefore all mail to the internet would be stamped '@ourdomain', but all
company mail to companydomain stamped '@ourhost.companydomain'; this is to
avoid replied to sensitive company mail being routed via the internet.
What's the best strategy to approach this with qmail?
Thus far I'd decided on a virtualdomain as follows:
companydomain:alias-companydomain
and in ~alias/.qmail-company-domain:
| preline -d -f swap_from | qmail-remote relay.ourdomain $SENDER
$RECIPIENT
'swap_from' is obviously a program to explicitely change the From: field
to the company required one one.
This solution works OK in normal circumstances but is not at all robust
because if the relay is down then the mail gets lost. It seems as though
qmail-send isn't designed to listen to what a virtualdomain returns - it
just deletes it from the queue and assumes the piped programs will know
what to do with it(?)
I really do not wish to have to open a two-way pipe to qmail-remote just to
read what it returns - even then if I re-inject failures using new-inject or
qmail-inject back in to the queue it will loop inefficiently (not using the
usual defferal mechanism) and I'd have to hack sleeps in to it just to avoid
the load sensible ... one of my arguments for using qmail is that it's
massively simpler for an administrater to set up than sendmail (and it is,
provided everyone else's domain is also set up properly).
I hope someone can tell me that I'm doing it all wrong and that there's a
simpler and more robust way of solving this header re-writing problem
efficiently!
Many thanks in advance,
Paul
--
Paul Halliday ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
MIS Department
Sony Manufacturing Co UK(BGD)
______________________________________________________________________________
| Disclaimer: Any opinions expressed in this message are not necessarily those |
| of the corporation and should therefore be assumed my own. |
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
* * * * * Notice Of Disclaimer & Confidentiality * * * * *
The contents of this E:Mail message does not in any way constitute
the opinion of Sony Manufacturing Co. UK, but that of the individual
person who composed it.
It is intended for the named addressee only and it contains
information which may be confidential and privileged.
Unless you are the named addressee or authorised to receive it
on their behalf, you may not use, copy or disclose it's contents to
anyone else.
If you have received this message by mistake please contact:
Sony Manufacturing Co. UK., Bridgend Industrial Est.,
Bridgend, Mid Glam, CF31 3YH.
Tel (+44) 01656 767000, Fax (+44) 01656 767222
MIS Manager
