[Wietse]
I just stubled across this thread:
http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/exim/users/90005
We could take a bold step and do it in two main stream MTAs,
damn the torpedoes.
Let's not call it a bold step, let's call it a bottom-up approach ;-). I
can't speak for Oracle, but I
* Claus Assmann postfix-users@postfix.org:
Per RCPT filtering is a feature that is often asked by ISPs who
offer anti-spam/virus for their customers: some pay for additional
filtering.
In Germany you either reject globally in session, and stick with the law, or
you reject post-queue per
Patrick Ben Koetter:
* Claus Assmann postfix-users@postfix.org:
Per RCPT filtering is a feature that is often asked by ISPs who
offer anti-spam/virus for their customers: some pay for additional
filtering.
In Germany you either reject globally in session, and stick with
the law, or you
Wietse wrote:
To make per-recipient end-of-data replies useful with Postfix, PRDR
would need to be supported by at least one third-party content
inspection mechanism (such as Amavisd-new or Milter), because I see
no obvious user interface for PRDR with Postfix header/body_checks.
-
On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 09:11:55AM -0500, Wietse Venema wrote:
To make per-recipient end-of-data replies useful with Postfix, PRDR
would need to be supported by at least one third-party content
inspection mechanism (such as Amavisd-new or Milter), because I see
no obvious user interface for
On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 03:23:11PM +0100, Mark Martinec wrote:
Wietse wrote:
To make per-recipient end-of-data replies useful with Postfix, PRDR
would need to be supported by at least one third-party content
inspection mechanism (such as Amavisd-new or Milter), because I see
no obvious
Viktor Dukhovni:
On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 09:11:55AM -0500, Wietse Venema wrote:
To make per-recipient end-of-data replies useful with Postfix, PRDR
would need to be supported by at least one third-party content
inspection mechanism (such as Amavisd-new or Milter), because I see
no
On Tue, Nov 22, 2011, Wietse Venema wrote:
It's a shame http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-hall-prdr-00.txt or
something like it never went anywhere.
It is surprising, considering that there is experience with
per-recipient data replies in LMTP, and that it is straightforward
to implement
Claus Assmann:
On Tue, Nov 22, 2011, Wietse Venema wrote:
It's a shame http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-hall-prdr-00.txt or
something like it never went anywhere.
It is surprising, considering that there is experience with
per-recipient data replies in LMTP, and that it is
On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 08:30:49PM -0500, Wietse Venema wrote:
I just stubled across this thread:
http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/exim/users/90005
We could take a bold step and do it in two main stream MTAs,
damn the torpedoes.
Is it worth the effort? Will enough SMTP clients
On Wed, Nov 23, 2011, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 08:30:49PM -0500, Wietse Venema wrote:
I just stubled across this thread:
http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/exim/users/90005
We could take a bold step and do it in two main stream MTAs,
damn the torpedoes.
11 matches
Mail list logo
