From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 12:43:16 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 12:43:06 -0400 Received: from spike.porcupine.org ([168.100.189.2]:33801 "EHLO spike.porcupine.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Thu, 6 Sep 2001 12:42:54 -0400 Subject: Re: notion of a local address [was: Re: ioctl SIOCGIFNETMASK: ip alias bug 2.4.9 and 2.2.19] In-Reply-To: <20010906203854.A23109@castle.nmd.msu.ru> "from Andrey Savochkin at Sep 6, 2001 08:38:54 pm" To: Andrey Savochkin Date: Thu, 6 Sep 2001 12:43:14 -0400 (EDT) Cc: Matthias Andree , Wietse Venema , Andi Kleen , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org X-Time-Zone: USA EST, 6 hours behind central European time X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL82 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Message-Id: <20010906164314.74F68BC06C@spike.porcupine.org> From: wietse@porcupine.org (Wietse Venema) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Andrey Savochkin: > You are missing my point. > Local addresses do not exist at all, there are no such entity in the physical > world. Allow me to be the first to welcome you to the real world. Welcome! An SMTP MTA is required to correctly recognize user@[ip.address] as local. That's the rules, like it or not. These address forms are actually being used, like it or not. It also is desirable for an MTA to treat clients on local subnets different than strangers that happen to be on the same class A, like it or not. Failure to do so can make one end up on black lists, like it or not. So, I repeat my request for *constructive* contributions on how to deal with these issues on Linux, when everything already works correctly for all other Postfix-supported systems, like it or not. Wietse