On 22.09.24 20:06, Christian Schulte wrote:
> On 22.09.24 19:34, Christian Schulte wrote:
>> On 22.09.24 18:46, Philipp wrote:
>>> [2024-09-22 16:04] Christian Schulte <c...@schulte.it>
>>>> On 22.09.24 15:35, Christian Schulte wrote:
>>>>> On 22.09.24 12:16, Philipp wrote:
>>>>>> [2024-09-22 09:39] Christian Schulte <c...@schulte.it>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> [snip]
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> There are several problems:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> First of all it's not that simple to know for wich domains your server
>>>>>> is reponsible for. Yes you could check MX recourds and lookup the A
>>>>>> and AAAA records. But a negativ match isn't true, because you might
>>>>>> be a MX later in the chain or run behind some NAT.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Next when you have a server for outgoing mails and one for incomming
>>>>>> mails the mails within the domain might just be relayed like any other
>>>>>> mail. This way the mails for the "own" domain also flowin like other
>>>>>> mails from extern. There are other setups where your check wouldn't
>>>>>> work.
>>>>
>>>> If a SMTP daemon does not know about which domains it is responsible
>>>> for, I would rate such a setup as broken by design. That would mean
>>>> someone has given up lots of control about the setup. Doing all kinds of
>>>> routing solely based on network addresses and such giving up on SMTP
>>>> semantics, I do not understand why that may make sense.
>>>
>>> You miss the point.
>>
>> Seems I missed a lot of points by just reading the man page. Would this be ok
>> to add? Adds a new domain-from keyword to the grammar, though.
> I understand that ruleset_match_smtp_mail_from() refers to MAIL FROM -
> kind of.
> 
>         if ((key = mailaddr_to_text(&evp->sender)) == NULL)
>                 return -1;
> 
> I am just searching for a way to overcome that mailaddr_to_text in that
> function without needing to add an additional - for me redundant -
> domains table. There is no DOMAIN FROM command, of course. Well...
> 

match mail-from [lhs|rhs] ?

-- 
Christian


Reply via email to