OS/2 Sendmail (was: Mail store and forward gateway setup)

[John Thompson]

On Thu, 02 Dec 1999 17:11:15 +0000 (GMT), Simon Bowring wrote:

>>Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think OS/2's inetd does any filtering
>>based on accect/reject rules for given ports.  All it does is watch the
>>ports and start the requested services when a connection request comes in.

>You are correct.
>
>Note also that due to OS/2's rather "heavy-weight" process load
>and unload procedures, it's best not to use inetd (IMHO). Just 
>run all the individual demons you might want to use - they will 
>get swapped out if not used, and clients will see the OS/2 box
>as being much more responsive.

Another correspondant pointed out a third-party OS/2 inetd replacement
that apparently does do filtering: sinetd, availble from hobbes as
sinetd10.zip.  The docs suggest that it can do this filtering but I
haven't managed to make it work yet.  When I set things up they way the
sinetd docs suggest I am completely unable to establish any connections on
any ports.  sinetd simply reports "connection refused."   Is anyone here
familiar with sinetd?  It does not appear to have been updated since about
1996 so it may be an abandoned product.  The syntax of the sinetd.lst file
follows that of OS/2 inetd.lst, but includes parameters for  accepting
connections, eg the line:

telnet "telnetd.exe -u pass" one.secant.com # client in domain
one.secant.com  

in sinetd.lst supposedly allows clients from "one.secant.com" to connect
but blocks all others.  In practice it seems to block everything
regardless.  Another difference is the apparent lack of tcp/upd
designations for the connection type.  Ie, in inetd.lst one would
explicitly tell inetd that this is a tcp connection:

telnet tcp telnetd

I wonder if this is an inadvertant ommision from the sinetd.lst syntax.

Anybody know?