Re: spamd vs IPv6

2021-02-22 Thread Edgar Pettijohn
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

Re: spamd vs IPv6

2021-02-22 Thread Nick Guenther
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

Re: spamd vs IPv6

2021-02-22 Thread Edgar Pettijohn
upport. > 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?

Re: spamd vs IPv6

2021-02-22 Thread Nick Guenther
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. Pleas

spamd vs IPv6

2020-07-01 Thread Harald Dunkel
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

Re: spamd and IPv6

2018-02-18 Thread Aham Brahmasmi
> 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

Re: spamd and IPv6

2018-02-14 Thread Niels Kobschaetzki
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

Re: spamd and IPv6

2018-02-14 Thread Denis Fondras
> 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

2018-02-13 Thread Niels Kobschaetzki
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

2016-02-14 Thread Harald Dunkel
-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

spamd and IPv6

2015-05-22 Thread Heiko Zimmermann
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

spamd and IPv6?

2009-05-28 Thread Stefan Unterweger
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

Re: spamd and IPv6?

2009-05-28 Thread Stuart Henderson
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);