Hey Thanks Steve, define(`confDOMAIN_NAME', `home.canipe.org')dnl This worked like a champ..
Thanks again, Since you had the answer for this one, and you are running basicly the same setup as I am. DNS right now I simply have Bind (named) bound to port 53 in named.conf but that didn't work out entirly and I wound up forwading all request to another DNS server. insted of haveing master for any zones... I would like to be able to use this for master zones, etc insted of simply forwaring request to an outside. do you know of any good solution for this? Brent P.S yeah i know this should be another subject. *********** REPLY SEPARATOR *********** On 12/3/02 at 3:54 PM Cowles, Steve wrote: >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Brent Canipe >> Sent: Tuesday, December 03, 2002 2:50 PM >> Subject: Sendmail and firewall problem. >> >> >> Hey Guys, >> I know I'm not the only one that has run into this. >> But right off hand I don't know how to fix it. >> >> I have a NAT filewall with a public IP address. >> Behind the firewall is my mail server which has a >> private ip address 192.168.80.30. The firewall is >> set to pass trafic for certain ports to 192.168.80.30 >> >> That part all works fine.. >> >> The problem is my outbound e-mail. >> since the mail is being reported as from a server with a >> private address (192.168.80.30) it gets rejected by >> other servers around the net because the address is >> non resolvable. >> >> Is there a way to tell sendmail to report a differant >> address? like my firwalls address? > >You can always configure sendmail to bind to another ip address (see the >DAEMON_OPTIONS in your redhat supplied .mc file), but since your behind a >NAT'd firewall I think your only option would then be to implement a proxy >arp solution (versus NAT). > >You can also change the FQDN that sendmail announces itself as during the >EHLO handshake by changing the $j macro definition in your .mc file. i.e. >Change it to match the FQDN of your firewall's public IP. EX: > >define(`confDOMAIN_NAME', `mail.mydomain.com')dnl > >FWIW: I have an identical network design as yours. e.g. My sendmail server >is NAT'd behind a linux based firewall. I have NOT experienced the >reporting >problem you describe by remote MTA's. Yes, the first hop e-mail header >contains a 192.168.x.x address (look at the header of this e-mail), but my >public IP address of my firewall is reported during the EHLO handshake with >the remote MTA. So far (over 4 years) I have not had an MTA reject an >e-mail >from my server. > >Are you sure this is not a DNS problem (like reverse lookup)? > >Steve Cowles > > > >-- >redhat-list mailing list >unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?subject=unsubscribe >https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list -- redhat-list mailing list unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?subject=unsubscribe https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
