>...
>
>In message <200508222301.j7MN1xes022515@Plectere.com>
>	on Mon, 22 Aug 2005 16:01:59 -0700 (PDT),
>	Paul Shupak <paul@Plectere.com> wrote:
>> >State-Changed-From-To: open->closed
>> >State-Changed-By: perry@netbsd.org
>> >State-Changed-When: Mon, 22 Aug 2005 22:04:11 +0000
>> >State-Changed-Why:
>> >I don't think we want to link postfix with libwrap. Postfix has perfectly
>> >good internal mechanisms for all of this.
>> >
>> 
>> 	There are at least three very useful features missing from
>> the Postfix internal controls (unless they have been added in the
>> 2.2.x branch):  The only equivalent of the hosts_options "twist"
>One simple question.  tcp_wrappers are supported by original Postfix?
>If not, you had better ask Postfix people to support tcp_wrappers.
>
>-- 
>Takahiro Kambe <taca@back-street.net>
>
	Well, Wietse Venema wrote both tcp_wrappers and Postfix;  If
NetBSD were using "tcpd" (which I am *not* proposing, the built-in
support of most programs is far preferable), support would be "automatic";
Then the only need for support would be to add the various Postfix programs
to the configuration files.  Because NetBSD's tcp_wrapper/lib_wrap support
is slightly different than typical (i.e. no "tcpd", which I believe *is*
a significant enhancement), a NetBSD specific solution is required and
it seems unlikely that Wietse Venema or any other Postfix developer would
implement an OS specific solution.

	I certainly guess I could write a patch and submit it;  It would
be no more than likely a few dozen lines (just like the TCPWRAPPER support
in sendmail) in size.

	Paul Shupak