Am Freitag, den 26.05.2006, 15:02 +0200 schrieb Stefano Bagnara:
> Serge Knystautas wrote:
> > On 5/26/06, Stefano Bagnara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> Is what you propose a service like:
> >>
> >> public class RewritingService {
> >> public MailAddress[] rewrite(MailAddress address);
> >> }
> >
> > Just to throw it out there... one thing that makes sendmail rather
> > strong is that since it's aliases are quite structured, it can know
> > (and thus reject during SMTP protocol) recipients that it cannot
> > handle for authoritative domain. So perhaps add both a rewrite() and
> > a handles() method?
>
> Sendmail merges aliases, virtualusertable, users entries to fill in a
> single map for the matching.
>
> We can't do this because we have mailets.
>
> Let's say I have this mailet as my first mailet:
> <mailet match="[EMAIL PROTECTED]" class="ToRepository">
> ..repository infos..
> </mailet>
>
> In the SMTPHandler we are not able to understand that the mailet will
> introduce some sort of whitelist for particular senders.
>
> If we want to provide full fastfailing to the SMTPHandler we ask the
> users to move much of their logic from Mailets processed by the
> SpoolManager to Handlers processed by the SMTPServer.
>
> I could also have mailets that allow only specific combinations of
> sender/recipients and so on.
>
> So we can support facilities for site administrators to manually insert
> "filters" in the SMTPhandler to fastfail, but we'll never automagically
> do that if we don't remove the Mailet support.
>
> A middle step would be the "in-handler" processor: add a processor that
> is executed after the data is closed (as a MessageHandler) that simply
> run a full Processor (defined in the handler configuration, with it's
> own spoolrepository) and if the message is GHOSTED consider it a
> succesfull delivery, if the message is sent to ERROR it can reply an
> SMTP error to the data.
>
> SMTP specifications says that a similar process should take a small
> amount of time (to avoid duplicate send).
>
> This would not give us fastfail at MAIL or RCPT commands but would give
> an administrator one more level of control.
>
> StefanHmm, i don't think that do such tinks after the data is accepted is the right way. I often hat issues with remote servers that did such thinks and so my mailserver thought we lost the connection cause it get no answer for long time on high load. The data should be accepted as fast / soon as possible. But i understand the problem we have with the current mailet and matcher support. But anyway we should try to find a better fastfail support. bye Norman
signature.asc
Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil
