On Wed, 12 Feb 2003, Newsmirror wrote: > > Right now filter selection is pretty weak and now that I'm doing the > > inbound/outbound split is going to be even weaker. I was thinking about > > nuking the "filters" directory and have two files : > > > > filters.in.tab > > filters.out.tab > > I have been working with filters extensively along with the scope engine, > so I thought I'd give some comments from a user's point of view. > > Firstly, a inbound/outbound split would be a greatly appreciated addition > to xmail. It wouldn't be a day to late adding it to 1.14, since the current > approach makes it very hard to determine from a script whether the mail > currently being processed is going out or coming in.
It'll be in 1.14 indeed ... > I figure I could well end up having some ~30 entries in the in.tab, > and around 10 in the out.tab. Anyways, the proposed in/out tabs makes the > filters way more easily managed, having everying in 2 files and all. 30 is definitely not a problem, 10000 it might be. > As for the syntax, it looks ok to me. However, I don't know about the > cip/sip part and if does much good at this level, posing the cip would be > for access/exec restriction I guess a single range is too limited > for a common setup. Not that it would harm me having the option, but I tend to > believe people would keep the range 0.0.0.0/0 at all times for the sake of >simplicity. The reason for the "cip" is because you might want to filter ( not filter ) traffic coming from certain nets. Looking again at the syntax I think it'll be better to not have the command directly bolted inside those files, but to have a file name instead : "sender" "recipient" "cip" "sip" "filter-file" This will make changes easier. > Instead, exposing sip,and cip especially as @@ macros, IMHO would make this > info way more useful and flexible whereas a script author could take care of > any cip related stuff at the scriptlevel in any way he likes. I for one would > buy you several pints for a @@REMOTE_ADDR macro ;) The will be obviously exposed. > The sender/recipient part is a good idea, as long as the ? and * wildcards are > available in the same manner they are in some of the other .tabs. I suppose the > recursive feature introduced in 1.12 will still be around also, allowing fields > like "*.domain.com" and "*.com" etc. Yes, sure. - Davide - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe xmail" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For general help: send the line "help" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
