From owner-freebsd-stable Tue Oct 14 19:10:49 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id TAA05703 for stable-outgoing; Tue, 14 Oct 1997 19:10:49 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-stable) Received: from fly.HiWAAY.net (root@fly.HiWAAY.net [208.147.154.56]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA05694 for ; Tue, 14 Oct 1997 19:10:46 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from dkelly@nospam.hiwaay.net) Received: from nospam.hiwaay.net (tnt2-30.HiWAAY.net [208.147.148.30]) by fly.HiWAAY.net (8.8.7/8.8.6) with ESMTP id VAA29499 for ; Tue, 14 Oct 1997 21:10:42 -0500 (CDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by nospam.hiwaay.net (8.8.7/8.8.4) with ESMTP id SAA20164 for ; Tue, 14 Oct 1997 18:14:59 -0500 (CDT) Message-Id: <199710142314.SAA20164@nospam.hiwaay.net> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.0zeta 7/24/97 To: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Anti-spam sendmail in 2.2.5? From: dkelly@hiwaay.net Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 18:14:58 -0500 Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk I can't tell if my recent cvsup of RELENG_2_2 has the well known anti-spam anti-forwarding rules built into sendmail.cf by default. Checked /usr/obj/usr/src/usr.sbin/sendmail/cf/cf/freebsd.cf and didn't see anything unusual, but I'm no sendmail expert. Is this something that is tried and true enough to ship as a default configuration for FreeBSD sendmail? Something to slip in at the last minute? :-) Otherwise, wouldn't it be a good idea for 2.2.6? -- David Kelly N4HHE, dkelly@hiwaay.net ===================================================================== The human mind ordinarily operates at only ten percent of its capacity -- the rest is overhead for the operating system.