From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Jun 4 15:18:08 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 833DE1065673 for ; Thu, 4 Jun 2009 15:18:08 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl) Received: from wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl (wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl [IPv6:2001:4070:101:2::1]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 813148FC1A for ; Thu, 4 Jun 2009 15:18:07 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl) Received: from wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id n54FHto4034217; Thu, 4 Jun 2009 17:17:55 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl) Received: from localhost (wojtek@localhost) by wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl (8.14.3/8.14.3/Submit) with ESMTP id n54FHtc1034214; Thu, 4 Jun 2009 17:17:55 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl) Date: Thu, 4 Jun 2009 17:17:55 +0200 (CEST) From: Wojciech Puchar To: Dirk Engling In-Reply-To: <4A27D38B.6040108@erdgeist.org> Message-ID: References: <4A27D38B.6040108@erdgeist.org> User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (BSF 1167 2008-08-23) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Jails, loopback interfaces and sendmail X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 04 Jun 2009 15:18:08 -0000 > However, grep -R 127.0.0.1 /etc reveals, that sendmail in many places > assumes localhost to be on 127.0.0.1 instead of looking it up in > /etc/hosts or using 127.0.0.0/8 to identify a local connection. calling 127.0.0.1 from jail always loops back within jail. it's all fine. > > I worry that more programmers made those assumptions, possibly breaking > more tools. > > My question is: Who's the right guy to beg to fix sendmail or > alternatively would it be smart to allow each jail to have its own > concept of 127.0.0.1 on a dummy interface mapped to all jails, that it already have