[milters] Archive

Lists Index Date Thread Search

Article: 830
From: Panagiotis Christias
Date: 2006-02-25 22:15:58 -0500
Subject: Re: milter-sender & milter-ahead design question...

Removal...........: milters-request@milter.info?subject=remove
More information..: http://www.milter.info/#Support
--------------------------------------------------------

On 2/16/06, Anthony Howe <achowe@snert.com> wrote:
> Based on a request that is pushing me towards a thought I've had for a
> long while now, I'm considering dropping from the MX pruning code used
> in milter-ahead and milter-sender the access.db lookups for blacklisted
> MX entries. My thinking is that its probably overkill / redundant give
> all my other tests and just a waste of cycles. This would not affect B/W
> listing of a connecting MX.
>
> I would welcome some feedback as to whether this is a feature people
> think worth keeping in call-back and call-ahead code.
>
> a) did you know about it?
> b) do you take advantage of it?
> c) would you miss it?
>
> Right now, I'm inclined to disable the code, but leave it in for die hards.
>
> Comments?

Hello,

I'm not sure what are you talking about but since you mentioned the
access.db file for W/B lookups here are some late night thoughts of
mine. IMHO, using the sendmail access file to define the behaviour of
various milters (our experience includes milter-limit and
milter-ahead) can be a frustrating up to traumatic experience.

Sendmail defines its own access policy in that file and it can be
complicated enough by itself alone. Adding new keywords in the same
file sounded like a good idea in the beginning but letting them
interact with the standard sendmail keywords creates potentially
a mess.

I would strongly prefer that the milters had their own configuration
file(s) and in several cases some more flexible options (I'm referring
to milter-limit at this moment).

Kind regards,
Panagiotis Christias
NTUA NOC


Lists Index Date Thread Search