From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Aug 1 10:47:54 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D15358B2 for ; Thu, 1 Aug 2013 10:47:54 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kpaasial@gmail.com) Received: from mail-qe0-x22b.google.com (mail-qe0-x22b.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c02::22b]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8C164293A for ; Thu, 1 Aug 2013 10:47:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-qe0-f43.google.com with SMTP id k5so1024653qej.30 for ; Thu, 01 Aug 2013 03:47:53 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=4/c5hkG9+g9sL0XHaJwQxDfM2f5yPYqUf7H9X4gMZ+A=; b=RWE2SmlL+qil2bJcz5vNFk/mgRfOsZKM1MDzmo94DscP9eTjR14D605/M9vDY0xOme Um4QU+bjuv0zYNHTuvddk+xrzBcSQpizxYnw83Px/tE23pfhQEBrbrad/EG5Htkf0FxF 2Xvs24Lm+cMzRJfvnwE2/et9FOc/4maZzqGt1l/T1GZzK7rKhJVMNcXWTP8QVVgwAnLs UZAucMdOPPKhpgts794bHS/5Enz0yVq4G/fFD2oI59tXeQKOHrRHzcBV6d3GsH38+e5e vxEut59wD2HC9Y3q9rYY6KyP+/fHeUsyc2bikKp9zQGH6T34XOVbH6pQfEDswvIPyr3l xtfA== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.49.26.202 with SMTP id n10mr1076921qeg.60.1375354073590; Thu, 01 Aug 2013 03:47:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.224.78.194 with HTTP; Thu, 1 Aug 2013 03:47:53 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Thu, 1 Aug 2013 13:47:53 +0300 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Strange sendmail behaviour after upgrade to 9.1-BETA2 From: Kimmo Paasiala To: Pavel Timofeev Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 01 Aug 2013 10:47:54 -0000 Forgot to send to list as well.... On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 1:40 PM, Pavel Timofeev wrote: > Ok, I understand. Thanks a lot for excelent explanation. Maybe > sendmail ignores additional section? > > I use _default_ fresh system, so resolver is _default_ bind. > For investigation I've just installed fresh 9.1-RELEASE amd64, email > delivery works and picture looks different than on 9.2: > The default resolver is not BIND because it's not enabled by default. The nameservers listed in /etc/resolv.conf are used for resolving addresses in default setup (assuming they are filled properly by DHCP client or manually by user).