Re: spamd vs IPv6
On Mon, Feb 22, 2021 at 06:28:29PM +, Nick Guenther wrote: > February 22, 2021 1:22 PM, "Edgar Pettijohn" wrote: > > > Have you tried starting spamd with '-l ::1' to alter its address to bind > > to? > > I hadn't! But it's no help: > > comms# /usr/libexec/spamd -l ::1 -d -v -G 15:4:864 -C > /etc/letsencrypt/live/comms.kousu.ca/fullchain.pem -K > /etc/letsencrypt/live/comms.kousu.ca/privkey.paranoid.pem > spamd: getaddrinfo: no address associated with name > Looks like its hardcoded to only support inet4.
Re: spamd vs IPv6
February 22, 2021 1:22 PM, "Edgar Pettijohn" wrote: > Have you tried starting spamd with '-l ::1' to alter its address to bind > to? I hadn't! But it's no help: comms# /usr/libexec/spamd -l ::1 -d -v -G 15:4:864 -C /etc/letsencrypt/live/comms.kousu.ca/fullchain.pem -K /etc/letsencrypt/live/comms.kousu.ca/privkey.paranoid.pem spamd: getaddrinfo: no address associated with name
Re: spamd vs IPv6
Have you tried starting spamd with '-l ::1' to alter its address to bind to? Edgar On Feb 22, 2021 10:11 AM, Nick Guenther wrote: July 1, 2020 7:34 AM, "Harald Dunkel" wrote: > Hi folks, > > spamd(8) still mentions 127.0.0.1, but no indication of IPv6 support. > Looking on Google for "openbsd spamd ipv6" gives me some entries of > 2015 and 2016, but no up-to-date information. Please excuse if I am > too blind to see. > > I am a big fan of spamd, but I wonder is spamd in a dead-end wrt IP > address families? Would you recommend "IPv4 only" for EMail? I was just wondering about this too! I can't see a clear answer anywhere online either. I went looking because I realized that # /etc/pf.conf pass in log proto tcp to any port smtp divert-to 127.0.0.1 port spamd was becoming # pfctl -s rules pass in log inet proto tcp from any to any port = 25 flags S/SA divert-to 127.0.0.1 port 8025 I wondered where that `inet` was coming from. Eventually I realized that maybe pf was implying it from the divert-to, since, according to pf.conf(5): > divert-to [...] The packets will not be modified [...] so if a packet comes in as IPv4 (inet) is has to stay IPv4. I tried # /etc/pf.conf pass in log proto tcp to any port smtp divert-to 127.0.0.1 port spamd pass in log proto tcp to any port smtp divert-to ::1 port spamd and this became # pfctl -s rules pass in log inet proto tcp from any to any port = 25 flags S/SA divert-to 127.0.0.1 port 8025 pass in log inet6 proto tcp from any to any port = 25 flags S/SA divert-to ::1 port 8025 However if I actually tried to connect via IPv6 (`nc -6 mail.myserver.com 25`) I just get an immediately closed connection, presumably because ::1:8025 isn't open. Come to think of it, because spamd uses IP addresses to do its job, for this to happen the database format needs to be augmented to store the longer addresses, so it's not necessarily a simple change, and that's probably why it hasn't happened yet. I just double-checked by digging around in the code (which I am not finally experienced enough for, phew) and found: https://github.com/openbsd/src/blob/cf8f31167b4af5c8ea769ff3d8a5974a24fec6bb/libexec/spamd/spamd.c#L1427 smtplisten = socket(AF_INET, SOCK_STREAM, 0); So yeah, it looks like it's still inet-only, no inet6 here. -Nick
Re: spamd vs IPv6
July 1, 2020 7:34 AM, "Harald Dunkel" wrote: > Hi folks, > > spamd(8) still mentions 127.0.0.1, but no indication of IPv6 support. > Looking on Google for "openbsd spamd ipv6" gives me some entries of > 2015 and 2016, but no up-to-date information. Please excuse if I am > too blind to see. > > I am a big fan of spamd, but I wonder is spamd in a dead-end wrt IP > address families? Would you recommend "IPv4 only" for EMail? I was just wondering about this too! I can't see a clear answer anywhere online either. I went looking because I realized that # /etc/pf.conf pass in log proto tcp to any port smtp divert-to 127.0.0.1 port spamd was becoming # pfctl -s rules pass in log inet proto tcp from any to any port = 25 flags S/SA divert-to 127.0.0.1 port 8025 I wondered where that `inet` was coming from. Eventually I realized that maybe pf was implying it from the divert-to, since, according to pf.conf(5): > divert-to [...] The packets will not be modified [...] so if a packet comes in as IPv4 (inet) is has to stay IPv4. I tried # /etc/pf.conf pass in log proto tcp to any port smtp divert-to 127.0.0.1 port spamd pass in log proto tcp to any port smtp divert-to ::1 port spamd and this became # pfctl -s rules pass in log inet proto tcp from any to any port = 25 flags S/SA divert-to 127.0.0.1 port 8025 pass in log inet6 proto tcp from any to any port = 25 flags S/SA divert-to ::1 port 8025 However if I actually tried to connect via IPv6 (`nc -6 mail.myserver.com 25`) I just get an immediately closed connection, presumably because ::1:8025 isn't open. Come to think of it, because spamd uses IP addresses to do its job, for this to happen the database format needs to be augmented to store the longer addresses, so it's not necessarily a simple change, and that's probably why it hasn't happened yet. I just double-checked by digging around in the code (which I am not finally experienced enough for, phew) and found: https://github.com/openbsd/src/blob/cf8f31167b4af5c8ea769ff3d8a5974a24fec6bb/libexec/spamd/spamd.c#L1427 smtplisten = socket(AF_INET, SOCK_STREAM, 0); So yeah, it looks like it's still inet-only, no inet6 here. -Nick
spamd vs IPv6
Hi folks, spamd(8) still mentions 127.0.0.1, but no indication of IPv6 support. Looking on Google for "openbsd spamd ipv6" gives me some entries of 2015 and 2016, but no up-to-date information. Please excuse if I am too blind to see. I am a big fan of spamd, but I wonder is spamd in a dead-end wrt IP address families? Would you recommend "IPv4 only" for EMail? Regards Harri
Re: spamd and IPv6
> Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2018 at 11:30 AM > From: "Denis Fondras" <de...@openbsd.org> > To: misc@openbsd.org > Subject: Re: spamd and IPv6 > > > does anyone can tell me what the state of spamd and IPv6 is? I would > > have expected it to work but I can't set for exampe ::1 or [::1] as a > > listening address (neither alone or together with 127.0.0.1). > > > > Unsupported yet. phessler@ has a diff for it. > > Hi Denis, Thank you for the information. Hi phessler@, I am interested in the spamd and IPv6 functionality, primarily because an IPv4 address costs a lot and I wish to run an IPv6-only mail server. If possible, I would request you to please merge the IPv6 functionality in the base spamd. I understand that most volks will consider this to be stupid for someone like me who is still learning his way around an OS. However, OpenBSD has been relatively straight forward and hence my IPv6-only (mis?)adventure. Thanks. Regards, ab -|-|-|-|-|-|-|--
Re: spamd and IPv6
On 18/02/14 11:30, Denis Fondras wrote: does anyone can tell me what the state of spamd and IPv6 is? I would have expected it to work but I can't set for exampe ::1 or [::1] as a listening address (neither alone or together with 127.0.0.1). Unsupported yet. phessler@ has a diff for it. Thanks
Re: spamd and IPv6
> does anyone can tell me what the state of spamd and IPv6 is? I would > have expected it to work but I can't set for exampe ::1 or [::1] as a > listening address (neither alone or together with 127.0.0.1). > Unsupported yet. phessler@ has a diff for it.
spamd and IPv6
Hi, does anyone can tell me what the state of spamd and IPv6 is? I would have expected it to work but I can't set for exampe ::1 or [::1] as a listening address (neither alone or together with 127.0.0.1). Niels
spamd with ipv6 support
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Hi folks, last information I have about spamd with IPv6 support is WIP. Is there any code I could try? Maybe I can help, at least in running tests? Please mail Harri iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJWwJVyAAoJEAqeKp5m04HLJxMH/jF6nBeBn0gYe5HQj73vDgWL utLHaxkD1ODydZgQGd+mG0p6tHmV4924y/Bnq+m7IU1Qj26vk+rmeZVuImTHxv9J C6ug3PYRAKbLLC8FAJ0s4GekxUu4Ocb2ZlWWcq2BPFHVfZK/95NtypYPSvSyJqcB 1sMD44dgN914tAWsDzoGC3pGswDQqgwZmvyKuhiyT+I0/XzL+e1aWm5nQUNE+ruO QP4Qf6XM8SJcK5KBVODmQQJ7B/b9QOgsFwdLPfsMoZ6PheRMCVC2aq64YDV2TZTE EWGNiFSpKlRWRrZhDwRFopzLERmsznY0qhjlofJK5r9m2iE+VYjzQgUOcdm7nP8= =tpAm -END PGP SIGNATURE-
spamd and IPv6
Hi OpenBSD Team, are there any news about spamd and IPv6? OpenSMTPD is working fine with IPv6. So there is a usecase for spamd and IPv6 too. This is the last status I found: http://undeadly.org/cgi?action=articlesid=20131022072601 Could you give me a status update? Thank you in advance. -Heiko
spamd and IPv6?
Hello! Does spamd(8) currently support IPv6? Whereas I am able to spamdb(1) -a IPv6-addresses and they show up on subsequent visits to spamdb, netstat -a suggests that spamd itself is not listening on a tcp6 socket. Unfortunately, the manpages don't mention IPv6 at all, and I'm too poor a programmer to deduct it from the source code. To be honest, I wouldn't be surprised it spamd does indeed not support IPv6, there'd be hardly a point for it. I seriously doubt that *any* current spammer'd be using IPv6, but still: now that I've got that fancy new tunnel up and running I thought I'd play around with it a bit. s//un
Re: spamd and IPv6?
On 2009-05-28, Stefan Unterweger stefan+open...@rg-me.it wrote: Does spamd(8) currently support IPv6? No. There are parts of code that make a start at supporting it, but here is your main clue: if (sa-sa_family != AF_INET) errx(1, not supported yet);
