[nos-bbs] smtp gateway control

Michael Fox - N6MEF n6mef at mefox.org
Wed Dec 7 01:43:12 EST 2011

Hi Bill,


With respect, I don't think you read what I wrote.


We already send messages within our network without using the gateway.  We
use SMTP for all messages.  We don't use the postfix email gateway for
messages within our network.  We don't use the postfix gateway for messages
within all of amprnet.  We only use it when sending mail to external
internet e-mail users.


It is precisely the desire to CONTINUE to NOT use the gateway when it is not
needed that is the root of my suggestions.  Bob's suggestion would use the
gateway for ALL messages if a gateway is configured.  The issue is
controlling when JNOS makes use of the gateway - using it when needed and
not using it when it is not necessary.


Everyone from little kids to grandparents knows how to address mail messages
with smtp-style addresses.  They do it multiple times a day, every day.  We
like that.  That's one less hurdle for users.  That means pretty much zero
training for addressing a message.  They can use the same addressing style
in our network that they use every day in email.  They can mix internet and
packet destinations in the same message without having a magic decoder ring.
That is a good thing.  We don't want to go backwards.


I appreciate and understand your suggestion about rewriting smtp-style
addresses into non-smtp style addresses for local messages.  It's a novel
approach.  Yes, we could use rewrite to turn smtp addresses into old-style
bbs addresses and use bbs forwarding to move them around.  But that's added
complication to do what already works with a much simpler configuration.  


Also, there's a big problem with old-style bbs forwarding.  All of our BBSs
currently have the same call-sign - our club call for the county ares/races
group.  They are differentiated by an SSID.  So they are hosts
w6xsc-1.ampr.org through w6xsc-5.ampr.org.  Users don't have to remember
five unique callsigns.  (w6xsc may seem obscure, but "XSC" is the official
op-area designator for Santa Clara County, and appears on all types of
things, such as RACES activation numbers, etc.  So we all know it as the
county ares/races club call sign, and it's only one call sign to remember).


The current hostnames work fine for internet hostnames and SMTP.  But I
understand from talking with you that this naming scheme won't work for bbs
forwarding since each bbs would need its own unique call sign to configure
in the haddress.  That's a big turn-off.  


I don't see the value of having all of our users learn 5 different call
signs when one currently works.  I don't see the value in rewriting the
current standard mail address format known by everyone into an older format
know by only a small and shrinking population, and using extra rules in
rewrite and forward.bbs, just to recreate what already works with much more
simplicity.   To me, it makes much more sense to add the flexibility to JNOS
to make it easily fit into various modern SMTP environments, than to try to
force SMTP environments backward into something else.







From: nos-bbs-bounces at tapr.org [mailto:nos-bbs-bounces at tapr.org] On Behalf
Of Wm Lewis
Sent: Tuesday, December 06, 2011 9:22 PM
To: nos-bbs at tapr.org
Subject: Re: [nos-bbs] smtp gateway control


Within your network, you can send messages directly to each other without
using your gateway.
You just want to send them address more like this :
Where AB6CDE is the intended recipient and WX6YZ is the intended station
within your network.
In this manner you want to avoid addressing messages in a form that looks
like an internet email address.
Meaning you'd want to avoid addressing like this:
SP AB6CDE <mailto:AB6CDE at WX6YZampr.org> @WX6YZampr.org
<mailto:AB6CDE at WX6YZampr.org>  
By addressing in the first manner, your rewrite file can and your
forward.bbs file can work together to route your internal LAN/NETWORK
messages around to each other and avoid internet email altogether.
In fact, your rewrite file can have rules to catch messages addressed to the
second method, and rescan them as if they were addressed to the first
Doing this would seem to accomplish what you see (or what I believe you
A rewrite rule something similar to this:
  <mailto:*%25*@wx6yz.ampr.org> *%*@wx6yz.ampr.org     <mailto:$1 at wx6yz>
$1 at wx6yz    r
or simply
  <mailto:*%25*@wx6yz.ampr.org> *%*@wx6yz.ampr.org    WX6YZ

(You'll have to excuse HOTMAIL for trying to turn those into links)
Keep in mind that you would also want those rules to be first in your
rewrite file so they can be filtered into your LAN forwarding before any
other rules. This would prevent further rules from sending them someplace
After that, all other messages addressed to an internet address not in your
LAN, you get passed over to your gateway to be sent onward.
I already do this for one station at the RF end of my LAN. If someone from
the internet were to send him a message addressed to
hiscallsign at hiscallsign.amor.org , that message does come into my gateway
POSTFIX first, scanned for garbage, passed to my JNOS, then sent over RF to
his station.
By the same token, if someone on my JNOS sends him a message ("SP
hiscallsign") that message goes directly to him via RF, and never gets sent
to my POSTFIX gateway.
I hope that helps.


From: n6mef at mefox.org
To: nos-bbs at tapr.org
Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2011 16:11:09 -0800
Subject: Re: [nos-bbs] smtp gateway control

As I said, we have a network of JNOS systems with a gateway for mail to
others.  The gateway uses Postfix.  But it doesn't make sense to send
everything to a gateway, when JNOS can talk directly to JNOS with a single



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.tapr.org/pipermail/nos-bbs_lists.tapr.org/attachments/20111206/38aec216/attachment.html>

More information about the nos-bbs mailing list