Re: XFORWARD Vs PDP

[Gustav Meirinho]

Exactly the opposite. This would be the desired response in "PDP": request=smtpd_access_policy protocol_state=RCPT protocol_name=SMTP helo_name=some.domain.tld queue_id=8045F2AB23 [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] recipient_count=0 client_address=1.2.3.4 client_name=another.domain.tld reverse_client_name=another.domain.tld instance=123.456.7 (...) xfwdname=spike.porcupine.org xfwdaddr=168.100.189.2 xfwdproto=ESMTP xfwdhelo=spike.porcupine.org Victor Duchovni escreveu: On Mon, Oct 27, 2008 at 02:55:07PM -0400, Wietse Venema wrote: Mark Martinec: WTF PDP? Policy delegation protocol, I suppose. Confirmed (I referred him to the mailing list, and have no more information than what has already been posted). Then perhaps the question is about expanding the state passed via XFORWARD to include everything known to the receiving SMTP server, including SASL login names, client cert fingerprints, ... If so, this is unlikely to happen. A policy daemon on the input instance can, if it so chooses, prepend a custom header to encode additional desired "envelope" details, and this header can be parsed by downstream filters. One limitation is that prepending multiple headers in a single policy call is not currently possible. A milter may be necessary for more complex processing.