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