[pfx] Re: milter: how about a SMFIP_NOQUIT?

2024-05-02 Thread Steffen Nurpmeso via Postfix-users
Wietse Venema via Postfix-users wrote in <4vvgyx1yynzj...@spike.porcupine.org>: |Wietse Venema via Postfix-users: |> Looks like there is sufficient basis to make SMTPD_QUIT_NC rerquests |> thts from Postfix. Just need to figure out how to enable/disable |> this particular command based on the

[pfx] Re: milter: how about a SMFIP_NOQUIT?

2024-05-02 Thread Wietse Venema via Postfix-users
Wietse Venema via Postfix-users: > Looks like there is sufficient basis to make SMTPD_QUIT_NC rerquests > thts from Postfix. Just need to figure out how to enable/disable > this particular command based on the Postfix and Milter protocol > versions. There is already some 'set' intersection code for

[pfx] Re: milter: how about a SMFIP_NOQUIT?

2024-02-01 Thread Steffen Nurpmeso via Postfix-users
Wietse Venema via Postfix-users wrote in <4tqkyr4p2zzj...@spike.porcupine.org>: |Looks like there is sufficient basis to make SMTPD_QUIT_NC rerquests |thts from Postfix. Just need to figure out how to enable/disable |this particular command based on the Postfix and Milter protocol |versions. T

[pfx] Re: milter: how about a SMFIP_NOQUIT?

2024-01-31 Thread Claus Assmann via Postfix-users
FYI: the libmilter interface is an internal communication protocol. It is NOT publically documented on purpose (hence complaining about missing documentation is somehow annoying). -- Please don't Cc: me, use only the list for replies. ___ Postfix-users

[pfx] Re: milter: how about a SMFIP_NOQUIT?

2024-01-31 Thread Wietse Venema via Postfix-users
Looks like there is sufficient basis to make SMTPD_QUIT_NC rerquests thts from Postfix. Just need to figure out how to enable/disable this particular command based on the Postfix and Milter protocol versions. There is already some 'set' intersection code for doing such things on the Postfix side.

[pfx] Re: milter: how about a SMFIP_NOQUIT?

2024-01-31 Thread Steffen Nurpmeso via Postfix-users
Wietse Venema via Postfix-users wrote in <4tqfyk4qzqzj...@spike.porcupine.org>: |Steffen Nurpmeso via Postfix-users: |> Wietse Venema via Postfix-users wrote in |> <4tqc213rcwzj...@spike.porcupine.org>: |>|So you're suggesting that as long as an MTA-to Milter connection |>|is not in an error

[pfx] Re: milter: how about a SMFIP_NOQUIT?

2024-01-31 Thread Wietse Venema via Postfix-users
Steffen Nurpmeso via Postfix-users: > Wietse Venema via Postfix-users wrote in > <4tqc213rcwzj...@spike.porcupine.org>: > |So you're suggesting that as long as an MTA-to Milter connection > |is not in an error state, sending > | > |SMFIC_QUIT_NC > | > |and later sending > | > |SM

[pfx] Re: milter: how about a SMFIP_NOQUIT?

2024-01-31 Thread Steffen Nurpmeso via Postfix-users
Steffen Nurpmeso wrote in <20240131203248.XtHi_6Do@steffen%sdaoden.eu>: |Wietse Venema via Postfix-users wrote in | <4tqc213rcwzj...@spike.porcupine.org>: ||So you're suggesting that as long as an MTA-to Milter connection ||is not in an error state, sending || ||SMFIC_QUIT_NC || ||and

[pfx] Re: milter: how about a SMFIP_NOQUIT?

2024-01-31 Thread Steffen Nurpmeso via Postfix-users
Wietse Venema via Postfix-users wrote in <4tqc213rcwzj...@spike.porcupine.org>: |So you're suggesting that as long as an MTA-to Milter connection |is not in an error state, sending | |SMFIC_QUIT_NC | |and later sending | |SMTIC_CONNECT | |are sufficient to make a Milter fully f

[pfx] Re: milter: how about a SMFIP_NOQUIT?

2024-01-31 Thread Wietse Venema via Postfix-users
So you're suggesting that as long as an MTA-to Milter connection is not in an error state, sending SMFIC_QUIT_NC and later sending SMTIC_CONNECT are sufficient to make a Milter fully forget a past SMTP session and to make it ready to handle events from a new SMTP session? I'd like to

[pfx] Re: milter: how about a SMFIP_NOQUIT?

2024-01-31 Thread Steffen Nurpmeso via Postfix-users
Wietse Venema via Postfix-users wrote in <4tq7t76ypkzj...@spike.porcupine.org>: |Claus Assmann via Postfix-users: |>> SMFIP_NOQUIT would |>> be a good protocol extension in general |> |> "Use the source, Luke." |> |> You mean something like |> SMFIC_QUIT_NC |> ? | |And... Postfix 'kn

[pfx] Re: milter: how about a SMFIP_NOQUIT?

2024-01-31 Thread Viktor Dukhovni via Postfix-users
On Wed, Jan 31, 2024 at 12:13:51PM -0500, Wietse Venema via Postfix-users wrote: > - The MTA then needs to keep the Milter connection open while watting > for new work. Once there is work, the MTA sends SMFIC_CONNECT and > so on. > > - This sounds like the MTA needs a Milter connection cache that

[pfx] Re: milter: how about a SMFIP_NOQUIT?

2024-01-31 Thread Wietse Venema via Postfix-users
Claus Assmann via Postfix-users: > > SMFIP_NOQUIT would > > be a good protocol extension in general > > "Use the source, Luke." > > You mean something like > SMFIC_QUIT_NC > ? And... Postfix 'knows' that constant since postfix-2.5.0, but there is no code to negotiate or send it. What would it

[pfx] Re: milter: how about a SMFIP_NOQUIT?

2024-01-31 Thread Claus Assmann via Postfix-users
> SMFIP_NOQUIT would > be a good protocol extension in general "Use the source, Luke." You mean something like SMFIC_QUIT_NC ? ___ Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@postfix.org To unsubscribe send an email to postfix-users-le...@postfix.org

[pfx] Re: milter: how about a SMFIP_NOQUIT?

2024-01-31 Thread Steffen Nurpmeso via Postfix-users
Wietse Venema via Postfix-users wrote in <4tpmnz1dqyzj...@spike.porcupine.org>: |Postfix has to be compatible with libmilter, the reference |implementation from Sendmail. It absolutely makes no sends for me |to unilaterally add features. If you wish to propose libmilter API |changes, such as c

[pfx] Re: milter: how about a SMFIP_NOQUIT?

2024-01-30 Thread Wietse Venema via Postfix-users
Postfix has to be compatible with libmilter, the reference implementation from Sendmail. It absolutely makes no sends for me to unilaterally add features. If you wish to propose libmilter API changes, such as claimng a code, then this mailing list is not the place to do that. Claus Assmann is on t