Date: Sun, 27 Apr 1997 12:26:29 -0400 (EDT) From: jamie@dilbert.iagnet.net (Jamie Rishaw) To: shovey@buffnet.net (Stephen Hovey) Cc: freebsd-isp@freebsd.org Subject: Re: SMTP gateway clients Message-ID: <199704271626.MAA07615@dilbert.iagnet.net> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSI.3.95.970426222147.10843B-100000@buffnet7.buffnet.net> from Stephen Hovey at "Apr 26, 97 10:22:21 pm"
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Well, it's kinda sick, but you could run.. sendmail -bd -q5m on the MX for their domain.. That way, if they are on for atleast 5 min, chances are if they have mail waiting it'll go to them. Or, you could have some script run (dont know what term server you are using) when they log in that will trigger a sendmail -q .. > They said, and I quote - "Im not spending $1000 on a new gateway just to > make up for your deficiencies." > > So actually I dont know why I give a flip. > > On Sat, 26 Apr 1997, Jay D. Nelson wrote: > > > I may be too dense, but I don't understand what `dial up' SMTP gains over > > UUCP -- except the added IP overhead. Am I missing something or does your > > customer just have a burr under the blanket? > > > > -- Jay > > > > On Sat, 26 Apr 1997, Steve wrote: > > > > ->On Fri, 25 Apr 1997, spork wrote: > > -> > > ->> I remember we hacked it with two by having one default through the > > ->> other... It worked, but the one acting as the gateway for the other was > > ->> not very happy... > > ->> > > ->> Please post your solution, as Annexes amuse me to no end. They are such > > ->> evil little boxes. I've also heard (not a routing expert) that RIP v2 > > ->> updates on any change, which would solve the problem assuming the Annex > > ->> can do v2... > > -> > > ->They do rip2, but it doesnt apparently work. One person sent me a > > ->possible solution. Using 1 class C for the annex ethernet cards, and the > > ->static IPs so that the ethernet cards would proxy arp them. Then another > > ->class C for the dynamic ones assigned to modems, then static routes in > > ->ones cisco to assist the world in finding the non-statics. > > -> > > ->I think I will tell the 1 or 2 people who want smtp to buy uucp or hike. > > -> > > ->> > > ->> Charles > > ->> > > ->> On Fri, 25 Apr 1997, Bill Grunfelder wrote: > > ->> > > ->> > How many RA4000s do you have? I have a solution (albeit an ugly one, but it > > ->> > works) if you've only got 2 of them, and a cisco router (not sure if it will > > ->> > work with others). > > ->> > > > ->> > > > ->> > Bill > > ->> > ....................................................................... > > ->> > Bill Grunfelder System Administrator > > ->> > wjgrun@cyberwar.com Cyber Warrior, Inc. > > ->> > http://www.cyberwar.com/~wjgrun/ (201) 703-1517 > > ->> > > > ->> > -The above does not necessarily coincide with the views of my employer- > > ->> > > > ->> > > ->> > > -> > > > > > -- jamie g.k. rishaw <jamie@@iagnet.net> Internet Access Group Chance favors the prepared mind. __ [http://www.iagnet.net] DID:216.902.5455 FAX:216.623.3566 \/ 800:800.637.4IAGx5455
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199704271626.MAA07615>