sophana wrote: > Unfortunately, I did the test some weeks ago, and the logs have been > rotated away... > I don't think I'd like to bother 3500 users again with my mass emails... > If you have a solution to test this, without real email... > If you're serious about fixing this, then you need to be able to reproduce the problem at will. How else can you tell whether the problem's fixed? It's especially more difficult to solve this problem if the evidence is lost; if your memory's anything near as bad as mine, you've forgotten important information, confused it and/or never noticed in the first place:-) You don't have to use real users, and you probably don't have to havr 3500 addresses, but you do need some that work and some that don't. Assuming you have your own LAN, you could use an alternative domain name and configure two or three hosts to receive email for that domain name. I use the TLD "lan" for my testing and anything the world at large shouldn't see: [summer at ns ~]$ host demo.lan demo.lan has address 192.168.9.1 [summer at ns ~]$ host test.lan test.lan has address 192.168.7.254 [summer at ns ~]$ host office.lan office.lan has address 192.168.1.252 [summer at ns ~]$ You don't need separate hardware, in my case I could overlay 10.1.1.0/24 on 192.168.9.0 by configuring eth0:0 on the various machines: sudo ifconfig eth0:0 10.1.0.146 netmask 255.255.255.0 and so on. You will need to configure the zones you choose in bind. Read the docs if you need help here. -- Cheers John -- spambait 1aaaaaaa at coco.merseine.nu Z1aaaaaaa at coco.merseine.nu Tourist pics http://portgeographe.environmentaldisasters.cds.merseine.nu/ Please do not reply off-list