- Previous message: Evan Platt: "Re: Requires valid sender domain?"
- Maybe in reply to: Ronald F. Guilmette: "Policy Server Protocol - Enhancement Request #2"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
|
|
|
From: Wietse Venema (no email)
Date: Fri Dec 01 2006 - 18:42:32 EST
Ronald F. Guilmette:
>
> In message <>, Wietse wrote:
>
> >> For example, here at monkeys.com, I have both "root" and "postmaster"
> >> aliased to the local (actual) user account called "admin".
> >
> >It's actually a lot worse than that. Aliases can expand to multiple
> >recipients. Whose policy would you use?
> >
> >And if that is not bad enough, some aliases can expand to shell
> >commands or file pathnames...
>
> Well, yea, you've definitely got me there. You've got a good point,
> or should I say "points".
>
> I'd like to be able to call the points that you have just made a
> "fly in the ointment", but I have to confess that they are more
> like an elephant in the ointment.
>
> So I'll hereby retract my Policy Server Protocol enhancement request (#2)
> and instead just ask if you might like to suggest any actually workable
> solution to the problem that I posed.
I haven't got one. I can't support features that don't work for
multi-recipient aliases or file/command deliveries. Enough of
such incomplete features, and everyoe would go nuts.
> Given that I'd like incoming
> mail that's sent to either or
> processed (policy-wise) in a manner to be determined by the local user
> account called "admin", is there any relatively clean way to accomplish
> this, i.e. via an external policy server?
>
> Should I just go ahead and build a policy server that will perform its own
> independent recipient address rewriting?
If you have no multi-recipient aliases or file/command deliveries,
then you can generate a lookup table that contains for each valid
recipient the mapping to its policy file pathname, and use that
mapping for the policy daemon decisions.
Wietse
|
|
|