From owner-freebsd-doc@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Apr 10 08:33:07 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-doc@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 19599F1D for ; Thu, 10 Apr 2014 08:33:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: from eu1sys200aog102.obsmtp.com (eu1sys200aog102.obsmtp.com [207.126.144.113]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6FB521431 for ; Thu, 10 Apr 2014 08:33:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-wi0-f172.google.com ([209.85.212.172]) (using TLSv1) by eu1sys200aob102.postini.com ([207.126.147.11]) with SMTP ID DSNKU0ZXFtuRe0e2qBeuleB+3+ZhuUDcX8G0@postini.com; Thu, 10 Apr 2014 08:33:05 UTC Received: by mail-wi0-f172.google.com with SMTP id hi2so10243311wib.11 for ; Thu, 10 Apr 2014 01:32:13 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:sender:date:from:message-id:to:subject:reply-to; bh=6bWSYHg0aacehwA1BJb5gTtWIoZpF3jHdtb/5m8TPuk=; b=ETyOgMgiSVoURPycN5DzVPTdWaZHwLdSktb2div2BKILBtn9XNEI6aSgKGW92555V6 SOhh/b/mo47sCPPFmNIwwrwT7KvnXv4QNtwNJ5DWsPnBIzXWJB1hiRlDcM5nUJ6FQ3Qh 6+W1wwNoPKaHlGBa6g0MlLTFV60jWn0dzXsJ4BYStfwWVWfopNrbARvP6ligT+xN9cGg LZzf6W4MHLG32GhiaeEhiAEIoQnluclDVOb2CjYP6uy+L1WQJ6+5UngH6h6KEoLgl3Ou CUxU0kor/cYl5r9/A/YIUTqzgg9D3rav8HqJRQ2Rz57Q+nisP2Nxmg6D+TjZO3HA8Ufm KVkQ== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmt/yTS12O992aFd4d67tC4GQ+R6+WLLqUkNO/mTZvsTLkv5BYcTPlRxCWnGX7p/T3JIcXVn0QutPf5GVv4zBQcP6E2RcAcHpiTCM5tqqLEl0JqpbKLNevEd60o0cOVIislFKMV X-Received: by 10.194.24.74 with SMTP id s10mr13747485wjf.43.1397118733138; Thu, 10 Apr 2014 01:32:13 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.194.24.74 with SMTP id s10mr13747478wjf.43.1397118733052; Thu, 10 Apr 2014 01:32:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mech-cluster241.men.bris.ac.uk (mech-cluster241.men.bris.ac.uk. [137.222.187.241]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id gz1sm9548683wib.14.2014.04.10.01.32.12 for (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 10 Apr 2014 01:32:12 -0700 (PDT) Sender: Anton Shterenlikht Received: from mech-cluster241.men.bris.ac.uk (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mech-cluster241.men.bris.ac.uk (8.14.8/8.14.6) with ESMTP id s3A8WBJA067371 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Thu, 10 Apr 2014 09:32:11 +0100 (BST) (envelope-from mexas@mech-cluster241.men.bris.ac.uk) Received: (from mexas@localhost) by mech-cluster241.men.bris.ac.uk (8.14.8/8.14.6/Submit) id s3A8WAsv067370 for freebsd-doc@freebsd.org; Thu, 10 Apr 2014 09:32:10 +0100 (BST) (envelope-from mexas) Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2014 09:32:10 +0100 (BST) From: Anton Shterenlikht Message-Id: <201404100832.s3A8WAsv067370@mech-cluster241.men.bris.ac.uk> To: freebsd-doc@freebsd.org Subject: authenticated sendmail, sec. 27.9, mention mail/sendmail-sasl alternative? X-BeenThere: freebsd-doc@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list Reply-To: mexas@bris.ac.uk List-Id: Documentation project List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2014 08:33:07 -0000 I've been using the recipe mentioned in http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/SMTP-Auth.html for a number of years. Just recently, following the openssl bug, I've heard that the alternative to the handbook route is port mail/sendmail-sasl. I haven't tried that port, but it seems the differences are potentially only due to the different versions of sendmail and openssl in base and in ports. I wonder if mail/sendmail-sasl should be mentioned in the same section as an alternative? Or perhaps there is a reason why mail/sendmail-sasl is not recommended in the handbook? Anton