[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Are there any moves afoot to do the same thing for qmail-remote as
qpsmtpd does for qmail-smtpd?
While many of the plugins may not be useful for outbound traffic,
being able to run clamav against everything, for example, would go a long
ways to being a good
Matt Sergeant wrote:
I've checked a fork server ... number of child limits.
Matt.
Here's a way to do number of child limiting:
establish a variable visible to both your forking loop and your REAPER
function,
as discussed in perldoc perlipc. When for returns non-zero, increment the
children-acti
Tim Meadowcroft wrote:
I started off thinking
it used to be that if you gave yahoo an address in a SMTP transaction
that did not have brackets around it you would very shortly thereafter
receive a ping flood. Just another example of Yahoo doing things right,
I thought.
This whole approach is et
Bryan Scott wrote:
I *do* like that one. :) It would be just as fun to figure out how to
use the trojan against itself, sort of like the cartoonish bending of
the end of a rifle back into the shooter's face.
another legend: when IIS expoloits were still simple, someone published
a web serve
Charlie Braddy wrote, on the qpsmtpd list, which is about
a perl drop-in replacement for qmail-smtpd:
If you are going to undertake the noble task of sucking up their
bandwidth, then I'd suggest that you do the job thoroughly, and make sure
that their TCP stack decides to retransmit as many pac
Sounds like locking discipline is not being followed consistently.
lock (or die, or wait and retry -- a blocking lock will do this for you)
open db file (or wait and retry)
manipulate db file (or gracefully handle out-of-space)
close db file (or die - very odd. You opened it didn't you?)
release l
throwing an
alarm $timeoutlength;
into the main event loop is certainly easy enough
Robert Spier wrote:
Is their a value that you can put in qpsmtp that limits the amount of
time a connection will say active? Something like
No. Not yet.
Definitely on my list of things to add. We've had
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 27 Apr 2004, Peter J. Holzer wrote:
On 2004-04-27 14:37:18 +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Specifically, I am trying to write a plugin that has hooks into
"mail", "rcpt", and "data_post". I need to accept (DECLINE) or reject
(DENY) based on the combinat
Robert Spier wrote:
Definitely on my list of things to add. We've had issues with
connection limiting and lack of timeouts.
Do you have an idea of how you would do it?
Two different pieces.
First, a timeout callback for each "transport".
(tcpserver,select,fork). In some cases, this might just s
I'm glad you like the Timeout interface.
the patch will silently accept other exceptions,
I would expand it even more, as seen below. self->dispatch
seems like the kind of thing that might die.
The timeout interface may appear as a unnecessary wrapper around
alarm, and in a forking server it is, b
sounds like a job for Inline::C have you tried it that way? instant
wrapepd libraries
On Fri, 17 Sep 2004 16:18:44 -0400, John Peacock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I am thinking of writing a Perl XS module to interface with [a] library
On Sun, 19 Sep 2004 07:36:55 +0200, Michael Holzt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> For clients coming from some (prior unknown) dialup isp with dynamic isp
> whitelists are impossible.
No they aren't they are just more complex.
--
David L Nicol, genius at large
IT Consulting since 1986
TipJar::MTA is damn close to qmail-send + qmail-remote in perl
On Tue, 21 Sep 2004 14:38:10 +0100 (BST), Matt Sergeant
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> OK, so bounce_verp is actually quite broken. It can't work for outbound in
> qpsmtpd - it has to be in qmail-remote. Maybe we'll have to look into
>
isn't one of those even an RFC? I don't think any MTA (with the possible
exception of PMDF) bothers to check
past the first number in deciding what to do. Am I wrong?
the whole rfc 1893 enhanced codes seem pointless to me, but that's a digression.
On Thu, 14 Oct 2004 20:57:48 + (UTC), [EMA
if the joker has arranged an SPF record at #ha*&(!LN.com I'm all for accepting
mail from him.
The disadvantage of making the test more complex is simply that the complexity
is needless. A meaningless edge case that does no harm is being categorically
ruled out.
When e-mail addresses (and this
On Wed, 17 Nov 2004 04:23:57 -0500, John Peacock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 2) use some out of band method to query the remote server for valid
> mailboxes; I
> wrote a small finger server which queries my central vpopmail MySQL database
> to
> validate the mailboxes; this is a much lighter w
e DNS for valid
> addresses and aliases before...
>
> peter
>
>
>
>
> On 11/17/04 2:39 PM, "David Nicol" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 17 Nov 2004 04:23:57 -0500, John Peacock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >
>
using As instead of CNAMEs will save a per-request round-trip at the cost
of slightly harder to read zone files
Well said.
Giving away the user list makes sense only when you don't care about
dictionary attacks. From the arguably daft visionary point of view where
we have solid server-side access restrictions, we don't care about dictionary
attacks, and publication of the valid user list in a way that can
I propose altering the error message on no-angle-bracket-error to
501 Let's see some angle brackets, bozo!
> > rcpt to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>rcpt to:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> > 501 could not parse recipient
--
David L Nicol
You're striving for harmony, and, if you try to take
too m
http://postmaster.info.aol.com/errors/ is a list of AOL's 421 and 554
error reasons.
The AOL MTAs parse message bodies for a variety of conditions that
trigger a 554.
--
David L Nicol
"It wuz bitchin!" -- a dude in a Larry Welz cartoon
the example given in the bad rcpt to line syntax error on postfix has
a space in it,
as seen recently telnetting to a postfix server.
I think rejecting based on stray spaces is being too strict.
>
> On second thought, I'm not so sure about that any more. Parsing SMTP
> commands is the job of
http://www.greylisting.org/
the idea is, reject any unseen source the first time it is seen, for an hour
or two. This cuts down on bot-sent messages at the small price of
delaying (!!! not requiring a full c/r) the first message from a new RAPNAP.
this would be a completely trivial plug-in. So
Having looked at the dspam documentation, in specific
the fact that tuning the server is to be done by forwarding
misclassified mail to designated addresses, I recall
drafting the "simple junk mail declaration protocol"
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.ietf.asrg.filtering/270
which is designed to a
On Mon, 14 Feb 2005 08:11:06 -0800, Elliot F <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I find it easier (and I think John is doing this too) to have users
> place misclassified spam into an IMAP folder, which is scanned and has
> the messages in it processed. That way, there is no remembering what
> address
On Tue, 15 Feb 2005 09:15:55 -0500, John Peacock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The more I think about it, the more I like David's "Simple Junk Mail
> Declaration Protocol" proposal, since this would allow the classifier to
> specify exactly how it would like messages to be presented for
> reclassif
i think you all need your medication adjusted
(david nicol, high on cigarettes and sleep deprivation)
perlmail
as in "the perlmail project"
"a perlmail plugin"
"humongoblat mailblocker is 100% compatible with perlmail plugins"
would we need LW's permission to call it perlmail?
On Wed, 23 Mar 2005 15:33:15 -0500, Bob <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> any expiring of database keys other than when they are
> accessed. That means expired but never-again or seldom-
> accessed keys bloat the databases. I guess the expiry checkers
> should write the day to a key in their db hash, a
does it do crypt() on the passwords? whenever I've done this
I crypt() the passwords.
On Wed, 30 Mar 2005 12:38:46 -0800, Ask Bjørn Hansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> .. Original Message ...
> On Wed, 30 Mar 2005 14:44:58 -0500 "John Peacock" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> >I say add it
so what's wrong with counting /^Received:/m in the header and issuing 550 and
bringing to the attention of a human when there are more than a hundred? Human
attention is going to be needed to straighten out the loop.
--
David L Nicol
Director of Research and Development
Mindtrustllc.com
how about, when analyzing ongoing loop problems in order to detect them,
when a loop is detected, due to received headers with hosts appearing multiple
times
my %CommonWords;
BEGIN{ @CommonWords{qw/
received from id with by host mon tue wed thu fri sat sun at
jan feb mar ap
On 4/20/05, Peter J. Holzer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So I think a prefork hook which is called just before the fork would be
> best. Arguments should probably be $client (the socket) and $hisaddr.
>
> Comments?
if qpsmtpd plugin compatibility is to be maintained across process management
arc
> STARTUP suggests "program startup" to me, not "connection startup". We
> already have some pretty long hook names like "unrecognized_command" or
> "reset_transaction", so mabe we should just call it "startup_connection"
> or "accept_connection". Or "global_connect"/"shared_connect" to stress
> th
I put a YAS grant in to write a pragma that turns any method-oriented perl
package into an asynchronous package by implementing message passing.
There's no general way to set such a thing up, at this time, with the possible
exception of using POE.
Would qpsmtpd make sense as a POE widget? Or rat
ys suck.
I might be in a good enough mood to slap together a selecting smtpd that
takes qpsmtpd plugins and supports a PENDING return code tonight -- or I might
not -- cross your fingers
David Nicol
On 5/10/05, Michael Holzt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm currently trying to hack TLS support for qpsmtpd. The idea is to use
> IO::Socket::TLS. I implemented a new starttls command, my current code is:
why not use an stunnel proxy?
Thanks to everyone for lucid responses to a rhetorical question
I agree that native TLS support would be very cool.
On 5/11/05, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> what would be the implication for multiple recipient
> connections if each additional recipient generated a 4xx error?
>
> Would the sending server DATA for the first recipient and
> reconnect for the next ones?
That what they're
On 5/12/05, John Peacock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The other thing I'd like to know before any TLS patch gets committed:
> how do most MTA's respond to self-signed certs, since most people don't
> expect to pay NetSol/Thawte/etc. for a server cert for each of their MX
> servers. And if self-si
On 5/12/05, David Nicol <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
was confusing when he wrote:
> better yet, the local cert would autovivify at the beginning
I meant "at the beginning of use of qpsmtpd at a site" not at the beginning
of a session or a connection. Automating the sysadmin task.
something like
if ((()=$Header =~ /^(Rec)/m) > 100){ # ()= to create temp array to count
On 5/19/05, Keith Ivey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> John Peacock wrote:
> > Keith Ivey wrote:
>
> >> I don't think there is any "Delivered-To" header yet, because the
> >> message
> > What is the reason for making it a plugin? It's part of the basic
> > function of qmail-smtpd, just like the check for message size, for
> > example. And not having it allows what are essentially DoS attacks on
> > the server, so it's not really an optional function.
>
> Because we like to k
On 6/18/05, Matt Sergeant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I've checked in support for a rudimentary form of continuations.
hooray
On 6/30/05, John Peacock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Elliot F wrote:
> > Another method (and a very scalable one) would be to store user data in DNS.
>
> Ooh, don't suggest that sort of thing on a DNS admin list unless you really
> like
> having a cheese grater rubbed on all your private parts.
On 6/30/05, Elliot F <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> One could also use ldapdns, ldap2dns, mydns, etc... There are more mature
> implementations of the idea. Anyway, it was another idea, on topic while John
> was talking about methods of validating user addresses.
SPF is a very flexible protocol f
I have uploaded asynchronous::universal::ready and
asynchronous::universal::set_callback
to CPAN. They are both entirely trivial packages with a mess of
documentation. The
idea behind them is to support asynchonous frameworks in which the
immediate result
of passing away a message is a placeholde
On 7/14/05, Matt Sergeant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 14 Jul 2005, at 13:16, David Nicol wrote:
>
> > asynchronous::universal::ready and
> > asynchronous::universal::set_callback
>
> I took a look at them when you loaded them to CPAN but couldn't quite
&
On 9/1/05, Bob Dodds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> To implement I want to use IPC::DirQueue.
>[...]
> It's site-specific spaghetti right now.
IPC::DirQueue uses FIFO, but in e-mail processing we want
to backoff our retries.
I implemented a directory-based queueing system for
TipJar::MTA, you're w
On 9/1/05, Bob Dodds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> David Nicol wrote:
> > On 9/1/05, Bob Dodds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > I implemented a directory-based queueing system for
> > TipJar::MTA, you're welcome to chip it out and wrap
> >
On 10/7/05, John Peacock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Peter -
>
> you made it an array ref, but never use anything except the first slot.
[...]
> I don't think that there should be any visible difference, nor should
> the hash deference be a significant slow down. Could you comment on why
> you di
On 10/27/05, Bob Dodds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> TipJar::MTA appears to run on one machine and replace
> qmail. It handles temporary delivery failures by exponential
> retry delay. I'm not sure I need to replace qmail-inject and
> qmail-queue for a non clustering situation. Maybe you'd
> like an
On 11/30/05, Robin Bowes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> John Peacock said the following on 29/11/2005 18:01:
> > Robin Bowes wrote:
> >
> >> One thing: I currently use tcpserver to enable relaying using
> >> pop-before-smtp, i.e.:
> >>
> >> -x /etc/tcp.smtp.cdb
> >>
> >> Is there anyway to do thi
On 1/6/06, Matt Sergeant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 6 Jan 2006, at 13:58, Les Mikesell wrote:
>
> > Is there an RFC requirement that the connecting host MUST
> > wait before sending anything?
>
> Yes, see RFC 2821 section 4.3.1.
Which says that the earlytalker error should be a 554 not a 450.
On 1/10/06, Bob Dodds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> You could write a
> log grep for that and have it page you or send an email
> [...] Maybe
> that ought to be an optional feature in the plugin.
>
> -Bob
Or something that could be included in the display of a
qpsmtod analogue to Eximon.
--
Dav
> > my ($untainted, $params) = $binary =~ /^(\S+)\s*(.*)$/;
> >
> > open(CPW,"|$untainted $params 3<&0");
What exactly is our security policy wrt trusting our configuration files?
This seems like a case where the best would be to have the plugin
look for checkpassword in /var/qmail/bin (fo
On 1/19/06, Johan Almqvist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> checkpassword is "supposed" to live in /bin, see http://cr.yp.to/
> checkpwd/install.html
I stand corrected
--
David L Nicol
Issa fak, iss nashral, everything is satisfakshual
On 1/25/06, Ask Bjørn Hansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> As a distro maintainer you should appreciate software licensed with
> the MIT/X11 license...
I have been under the impression that the AL is more permissive
than the MIT/X11 and there would be no conflict in distributing AL
code in a MIT
On 3/14/06, Joe Schaefer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] ("Peter J. Holzer") writes:
>
> > On 2006-03-13 13:40:06 -0500, Joe Schaefer wrote:
> >> The only other novel thing we do in the ASF is run the earlytalker
> >> plugin in the "data" hook instead of "connection".
> >
> > That is
Right you are.
On 3/15/06, Joe Schaefer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] ("David Nicol") writes:
> > Isn't that exactly what ESMTP PIPELINING is supposed to allow?
>
> No.
>
> --
> Joe Schaefer
rfc 2197 says:
The EHLO, DATA, VRFY, EX
On 3/22/06, John Peacock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Guillaume Filion wrote:
> > I don't think that your users want to use a web interface to share
> > files, use the plugin for both incoming and outgoing messages. Your
> > users will only have to send an email with attachment, as they
> > usually
On 3/22/06, John Peacock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> David Nicol wrote:
> > pgp-signed attachments.
> bleading edge technology... ;-)
So what's stopping you from using MIME::Fast or such and keeping
the large attachments on a designated large attachment disk with
When I wrote Tipjar::MTA, after sending lots of mail by telnetting to
my qmail-smtpd,
I left the angle brackets out. I added them when I could not send a message
to any @yahoo.com addresses.
Not requiring bracketing makes your smtpd easier to send through when you
telnet to it. Fewer keystrokes.
On 4/7/06, David Nicol <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I would write more but it appears that my building is on fire.
false alarm, apparently. Sorry
I think NO_ANGLEBRACKETS should be a flag set in the incoming message
object, so a simple REFUSE_NO_ANGLEBRACKETS plugin can look for
it and deny the message. That would be the qpsmtpd way, AIUI.
--
David L Nicol
Should the bike shed have bunks? Or maybe cots?
On 4/18/06, john habermann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Just wondering if I should submit and bug
> report to google.
Yes. And direct them to the "dateheader" module on CPAN. (although
google is a python shop.)
--
David L Nicol
Can you remember when vending machines took pennies?
advenge server ha(s|d) a headers-all-in hook when the data block switched
from header to body. Sometimes the message would fail at that point
and get handed to a very lightweight state that simply threw everything
away until the dot arrived then issued a policy 550. Sometimes the
message would p
On 5/15/06, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
use the username and password supplied by the client and then mimic
the client dialog to the actual mail server. If the actual mail server
responds with a successfull authentication then the front line qpsmtpd
server will allow the relay otherwise it will
On 6/27/06, Brian Grossman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
This patch adds --listen-queue, in case somebody wants to use something
other than SOMAXCONN.
It's purely optional. I kind of doubt anyone would ever care.
Brian
in case of thrashing due to heavy load this switch would be used
to reduce t
On 7/14/06, Bryan Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
First off is the per-user configuration goal (again).
as noted, you will have to clamp incoming rcpttos to one at a time
whenever the users do not have identical policies.
you can, however, accept
a second if their policy is exactly the same a
Feeling a little pedantic but I've already irretrievably destroyed my
reputation...
> package Qpsmtpd::Address;
> use Qpsmtpd::Constants;
>
> sub config {
> my ($self, $c, $arg) = @_;
> return 42;
> }
> snip---
I'm not enti
On 8/21/06, Fred Moyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Greetings,
I've hacked a method I needed into Qpsmtpd::Transaction called
body_front_write(), which writes to the front of the message body. I drew
heavily from body_write(), but couldn't find a way to avoid making a copy of
the body in order
On 8/23/06, Michael Holzt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This completely eliminates the need to actually modify the body text
> at any time, but the queue plugin will assemble the leading text,
> the message and the trailing text just in time when writing to the
> queue or whatever target.
"assemb
On 8/27/06, Peter J. Holzer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
But speaking of 551 return codes, I think using 551 with
one-time-addresses should be valid:
rcpt to:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
551 Mailbox disabled. Please try <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
rcpt to:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
250 ok
I just fear tham spamware wou
> On 28-Aug-06, at 1:05 PM, Robin Bowes wrote:
>
>> That's my interpretation of what happened - hotmail gives up after a
>> certain period of time and re-tries later.
>> [due to SA taking longer to analyze than the sender is prepared to wait]
what if the SA plugin had a timeout, and responded
On 8/30/06, Mike Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Then send a 250 but don't queue it.
I've had this in production for a long time.
warning: restatement of obvious follows, safe to ignore
This is a variance from what I understand as the BCP of
accepting such things but filing them where t
On 10/24/06, Peter J. Holzer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
http://rt.perl.org has a queue for qpsmtpd.
putting plugins on CPAN with a name convention,
like the DBI family of packages, would solve
the inclusion management problem IMO.
Project maintainer maintaining based on own
priorities is absol
On 1/8/07, Guy Hulbert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I think wiki reorg mail is on-topic and [...]
I agree that it is on-topic and share the expectation that it will
slow down soon.
The best practices concerning the synergy between a mailing list
and a wiki are still being discovered. Ideally, i
On 1/23/07, Hanno Hecker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Yes, had that too.. not that many connections, but I've seen running
connections that long. It turned out that some clients where sitting
there and just issuing NOOP every 30s without disconnecting. If you
can, log with LOGDEBUG and see if it's
On 4/18/07, Mark Farver <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Johan Almqvist wrote:
>
> Isn't a bounce just a message where the sender is <>?
>
I believe its supposed to be per the RFC but I have several examples in
my inbox that don't adhere to that. The guilty party appears to be
Exchange. The subject
there are two SMTP server roles in your organization. One is accepting inbound
from the whole world, the other is accepting outbound from your customers.
You could separate these functions completely with appropriately configured
settings for each. Since redirecting the external mailers is a sim
It seems to me that the right way to solve this would be to introduce
a new level of abstraction that allows creating a state machine and
running particular plugins based on the state. I do not know if
a "statemachine" plugin could be created using the current system
of if the current system woul
FWIW, TipJar::MTA now appears to run under ACtivestate perl. I just received
a dozen tipjar::MTA::queue testing notices dating back to 2002. :)
--
"It is not possible to make a mistake." (customary greeting given by
Bokononists when meeting a shy person)
I don't recall seeing Mail::Toaster discussed here. Did I miss it?
On 8/11/07, Matthew Harrell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Oh and the "attacks" that I've been noticing like this are, as John calls
> them, blowback from spam run. They're all to fake addresses on my domains
> but the majority of them are from postmaster at what look like valid servers
Sometimes
How does qmail do it?
FWIW, later on http://cr.yp.to/im/address.html Bernstein says
"Do not use an empty box part; it cannot appear in SMTP requests."
http://cr.yp.to/qmail/dist.html at this moment in time says:
QUOTE
I hereby place the qmail package (in particular, qmail-1.03.tar.gz,
with MD5 checksum 622f65f982e380dbe86e6574f3abcb7c) into the public
domain. You are free to modify the package, distribute modified
versions, etc.
This does not m
On Nov 30, 2007 7:46 PM, Chris Lewis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> David Nicol wrote:
>
> > This looks to me like, although he has PD'd the package, he intends to
> > retain the restrictions on the qmail brand.
>
> If he's made it PD, he cannot impose any
On Dec 1, 2007 11:18 AM, Charlie Brady
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Copyright is automatic but trademarks are not.
I don't know the exact rules, but there certainly are
situations where ownership of a mark does not require registration. The
best example is the saga of Torvalds recovering owner
> >
> > If the sender gets a tempfail for anything other than RCPT TO, I would
> > not expect the sender to split the resend, in fact, it's highly
> > unlikely.
>
> Right.
There were a variety of ESMTP proposals kicked around ASRG concerned with
putting the data before the recipient list; AFAIK n
On Tue, Jul 8, 2008 at 3:14 PM,
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Basically you just need an
>> understanding of how async programming works - from there everything
>> starts to become obvious.
never block for IO. Work out the state so that you can drop
everything and pick it up later whenever you wo
On Tue, Jul 8, 2008 at 4:33 PM, Matt Sergeant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> But do note what I've said here previously: async is for high CONCURRENCY
> not necessarily performance. Up to a certain level of concurrency prefork is
> faster.
>
> Matt.
with SMTP one cares about throughput more than res
enjoy, goes in plugin/queue/tipjar; based on qmail-queue. Takes the
MTAdir as a config argument, and checks it to be absolute and not
contain anything but [\w/].
tipjar
Description: Binary data
How does one configure the dnsrbl plugin to do whitelisting based on a dbsrbl?
the maintainer of
http://www.dnswl.org/tech
will gladly to add a qpsmtpd stanza if one is provided to him.
--
"When laws are outlawed, only outlaws will have laws" -- Ginger Root
On Mon, Jan 5, 2009 at 3:11 PM, Jared Johnson wrote:
> Chris Lewis wrote:
>
>> I'm not really suggesting that it be "adopted" in that sense. But what
>> would make sense is to have each plugin operating to a common model for
>> whether filtering is on, deciding when to reject, logging, reason
>>
Has anyone added a counter for results from installed plugins?
--
Lucky Cap'n Rabbit King Nuggets: For the Irish seafaring nobleman in YOU!
On Mon, Jan 12, 2009 at 9:52 AM, Jared Johnson wrote:
> Robert Spier wrote:
>>
>> What's the point of this? If you need the hostname in the pre-connect
>> hook you can look it up there from the IP address which you already
>> have.
>
> If you need to look up the hostname on every incoming connect
On Mon, Jan 12, 2009 at 10:39 AM, Jared Johnson wrote:
> Was the name 'remote_hostname' as
> opposed to 'remote_host' intentional?
no. I wrote that without looking at any references at all.
> As an aside, I don't really
> understand why pre-connection hooks need the same information they could
For what it's worth, I like "NEXT" better than "DECLINED" too.
"DECLINED" brings to mind embarrassing failures to charge additional
purchases on maxed-out credit cards, or some other form of rejection.
"NEXT" carries no such nuance, being a familiar and functional flow
control directive.
1 - 100 of 135 matches
Mail list logo
