On 11.7.2010, at 23.30, Brandon Davidson wrote: >> Well, you could make the doveadm interface available via TCP port, but >> that really should be firewalled well. Hmm. It wouldn't be difficult to >> patch doveadm director to also support connecting to host:port rather >> than unix socket. > > That would be pretty awesome. Rignt now I could try to talk Director > protocol from the management node to inject commands, but the Directors only > accept connections from other hosts listed in the ring, right?
Yes, but you'd also have to act as a proper director then. It's basically the same as running a director in the management node, which just doesn't happen to accept any client connections. > So having doveadm function over TCP would be a big plus. Done. doveadm director status -a host:port Works also with doveadm who and doveadm penalty (and anything else in future that communicates usually via UNIX sockets).
