From: Victor Duchovni (Victor.DuchovniMorganStanley.com)
Date: Mon Feb 12 2007 - 13:15:36 CST

• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

On Mon, Feb 12, 2007 at 01:55:53PM -0500, Victor Duchovni wrote:

> On Mon, Feb 12, 2007 at 01:45:09PM -0500, Wietse Venema wrote:
>
> > > I am thinking to make a version of greylisting where mails
> > > are put in HOLD queue and server reply with defer
> > > (using smtpd_end_of_data_restrictions + check_policy_service)
> > > This way I could fast deliver some msg if needed. But for this
> > > a new action needs to be added to access table , maybe HOLD_DEFER
> > > and HOLD_REJECT ?
> >
> > HOLD stores the message in the queue.
> >
> > DEFER tells the client to try deliver the message another time.
> >
> > The combination makes no sense at all.
>
> Well, it does if one wants to compute a checksum of the held message,
> and apply some expensive analytics, wait for signature updates, ...
> and to to allow delivery only when the client comes back with the same
> message a second (later) time. If the client never comes back, no
> message is delivered.

Of course this all really does belong in a milter or proxy filter,
because when the message comes back a second time, one needs to see the
content to be sure that it is in fact the same message. In so the access(5)
language is not the right vehicle for this, as it operates only on the
message envelope.

--
        Viktor.

Disclaimer: off-list followups get on-list replies or get ignored.
Please do not ignore the "Reply-To" header.

To unsubscribe from the postfix-users list, visit
http://www.postfix.org/lists.html or click the link below:
<mailto:majordomopostfix.org?body=unsubscribe%20postfix-users>

If my response solves your problem, the best way to thank me is to not
send an "it worked, thanks" follow-up. If you must respond, please put
"It worked, thanks" in the "Subject" so I can delete these quickly.

• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]