Am 08.07.2010 um 18:23 schrieb Noel Jones: > On 7/8/2010 10:58 AM, Philipp Leusmann wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> to stop backscattering I wrote a tcp_table server which checks quota >> availability for incoming messages. >> I read<http://www.postfix.org/tcp_table.5.html> over and over again, but >> still I am getting messages like >> >> Jul 8 17:46:24 s15277780 postfix/smtpd[3325]: warning: read TCP map reply >> from localhost:1337: unexpected EOF (Success) >> Jul 8 17:46:25 s15277780 postfix/smtpd[3325]: warning: tcp:localhost:1337: >> table lookup problem >> >> >> in the logfile, when the server returns a 400 or 500 reply. For a 200-reply >> it works ok and the mail is delivered. >> >> For a 400-reply, my server generates the following (from my logfile): >> >> The encoded reply is [400 User%20over%20quota >> ] >> >> >> The server sends everything between [ and ] . I think that should be ok. Or >> isn't it? >> >> >> When I try a >> >> postmap -vv -q "benny" tcp:localhost:1337 >> >> (benny is over quota) >> >> the output ends with: >> >> postmap: loaded dict_tcp_open = 7f50d057bd20 >> postmap: dict_open: calling tcp open routine >> postmap: dict_open: tcp:localhost:1337 >> postmap: dict_tcp_lookup: key benny >> postmap: trying... [127.0.0.1] >> postmap: dict_tcp_lookup: send: get benny >> postmap: dict_tcp_lookup: recv: 400 User%20over%20quota >> postmap: dict_tcp_lookup: soft error: 400 User%20over%20quota >> >> For a user having available space, it looks like: >> >> postmap: loaded dict_tcp_open = 7f30f5c76d20 >> postmap: dict_open: calling tcp open routine >> postmap: dict_open: tcp:localhost:1337 >> postmap: dict_tcp_lookup: key laus >> postmap: trying... [127.0.0.1] >> postmap: dict_tcp_lookup: send: get laus >> postmap: dict_tcp_lookup: recv: 200 OK >> postmap: dict_tcp_lookup: found: OK >> OK >> >> >> >> Can anybody tell me, what is wrong? >> >> And what does postfix return the the delivering client in my current case? a >> 500 ? >> >> Regards, >> Philipp > > The 200, 400, and 500 codes indicate the status of the lookup itself, and do > not indicate the result. > > 200, the lookup found something, here it is: (OK, DEFER, REJECT ... other > access(5) actions) > 400, the lookup table is broken, try later > 500, the key wasn't found > > In the case of an over-quota user, your table should return > 200 REJECT User over quota > or DEFER if that's the action you want. > > This isn't documented explicitly in the README because tcp tables can be used > for purposes other than access maps. > > -- Noel Jones
Noel, thanks for your advice. This really should be pointed out more explicitly in the documentation. As for 500, would it be a good practice to return 500, if the key, which in this case is the email-adress is not known at all? I also use a local_recipients_map, which already decides if a user exists or not. So, which of the both is evaluated first? local_recipient_maps or smtpd_recipient_restrictions ? What would be the best practice for my case? Regards, Philipp
