Anne Bennett:
[HELO info] comes in as a parameter in filter_relay.
David F. Skoll:
You must be running an old version of MIMEDefang, because that hasn't
been the case since version 2.43.
2.43 is indeed what I have. I intend to upgrade. Honest. :-/
It sounds as though I'll have to read
Jonas Eckerman [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
We do our HELO checks in filter_relay,
How do you do that?
I thought that neither the $Helo variable nor the commands file (from
wich the helo string can be read) was available that early in the
mimedefang process.
It comes in as a parameter in
Anne Bennett wrote:
[HELO info] comes in as a parameter in filter_relay.
You must be running an old version of MIMEDefang, because that hasn't
been the case since version 2.43.
Regards,
David.
___
NOTE: If there is a disclaimer or other legal
hello.
i tried to use the fqdn helo check provided as an example in the wiki.
when trying to send an email using a non-fqdn helo command, it is
rejected after mail from, not right after helo, as the manpages
suggests. is it possible to have mimedefang work as described, and
reject the mail right
Marco Meier wrote:
i tried to use the fqdn helo check provided as an example in the wiki.
when trying to send an email using a non-fqdn helo command, it is
rejected after mail from, not right after helo, as the manpages
suggests. is it possible to have mimedefang work as described, and
David F. Skoll wrote:
Marco Meier wrote:
i tried to use the fqdn helo check provided as an example in the wiki.
when trying to send an email using a non-fqdn helo command, it is
rejected after mail from, not right after helo, as the manpages
suggests. is it possible to have mimedefang work as
Marco Meier wrote:
i think the mimedefang-filter manpage should be changed according to
this. It says: This lets you reject connections after the HELO/EHLO
SMTP command.. In fact, they aren't rejected right there.
Actually, I have a better idea: If I completely remove filter_helo,
will
i tried to use the fqdn helo check provided as an example in the wiki.
when trying to send an email using a non-fqdn helo command, it is
rejected after mail from, not right after helo, as the manpages
suggests. is it possible to have mimedefang work as described, and
reject the mail
On Wed, 2006-11-08 at 10:24 -0500, David F. Skoll wrote:
Actually, I have a better idea: If I completely remove filter_helo,
will anyone morn its passing? Less code == better, and filter_helo
is next to useless.
I won't miss it.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message
David F. Skoll wrote:
Actually, I have a better idea: If I completely remove filter_helo,
will anyone morn its passing? Less code == better, and filter_helo
is next to useless.
as i don't see anything that can't be done in filter_recipients, this
would be less confusing.
regards,
Marco
Le mercredi 8 novembre 2006 16:24, David F. Skoll a écrit :
Marco Meier wrote:
i think the mimedefang-filter manpage should be changed according to
this. It says: This lets you reject connections after the HELO/EHLO
SMTP command.. In fact, they aren't rejected right there.
Actually, I
David F. Skoll [EMAIL PROTECTED] asks:
If I completely remove filter_helo, will anyone morn its passing?
We do our HELO checks in filter_relay, so it won't be a problem for
us. On the other hand, is consistency an issue? That is, if the
milter protocol allows for an intervention at a certain
Adam Lanier wrote:
On Wed, 2006-11-08 at 10:24 -0500, David F. Skoll wrote:
Actually, I have a better idea: If I completely remove filter_helo,
will anyone morn its passing? Less code == better, and filter_helo
is next to useless.
I won't miss it.
I wont miss it either.
John Rudd wrote:
I wont miss it either.
It's gone.
Responding to Anne Bennett from Concordia: MIMEDefang doesn't
implement a 1-to-1 mapping of milter callbacks. It has its own
filter_begin/filter/filter_end abstraction, for example, so I'm
not too concerned about removing filter_helo.
On 11/08/2006 02:17 PM, John Rudd wrote:
Adam Lanier wrote:
On Wed, 2006-11-08 at 10:24 -0500, David F. Skoll wrote:
Actually, I have a better idea: If I completely remove filter_helo,
will anyone morn its passing? Less code == better, and filter_helo
is next to useless.
I won't miss it.
remove filter_helo,
Go.
We score for bad helo, but we want to see first whether we get
smtp auth, or the recipient is our abuse address, so we would not
want to test it that soon.
Joseph Brennan
Columbia University Information Technology
___
Anne Bennett wrote:
We do our HELO checks in filter_relay,
How do you do that?
I thought that neither the $Helo variable nor the commands file (from wich the
helo string can be read) was available that early in the mimedefang process.
/Jonas
--
Jonas Eckerman, FSDB Fruktträdet
David F. Skoll wrote:
Marco Meier wrote:
i think the mimedefang-filter manpage should be changed according to
this. It says: This lets you reject connections after the HELO/EHLO
SMTP command.. In fact, they aren't rejected right there.
Actually, I have a better idea: If I completely
18 matches
Mail list logo
