On Mon, 2006-12-18 at 00:06 +0100, Michael Monnerie wrote: > On Sonntag, 17. Dezember 2006 18:36 Paul J Stevens wrote: > > Well, some of us will disagree there. The recipient MTA should also > > know about recipients. > > I got misunderstood: Of course the MTA must know which recipients exist. > I showed in an earlier e-mail my SQL query to the extended dbmail with > domains table. > > > > The MTA should only have to request if a user and/or domain exists, > > > and send it to the mailserver. The rewriting should be in there, as > > > is the information about real users etc. [snip query] > Why not throw the address as received from the MTA into dbmail, and the > "rewriting" is done there? It makes sense to do it there:
So DBMail does the rewrite before delivery. > And yes, I do of course recipient validation at MTA level. That's a > similar query: [snip query] So the MTA does the rewrite before handing off to DBMail. > Sorry that I stepped on toes here, I just like simple interfaces. Doesn't look like a simple interface to me at all! Btw, don't worry about toes. Arguing useful ideas is great. It only gets ugly when people start calling names to those who disagree. Thankfully, we've never had that problem here. Perhaps a solution is to have a 'dbmail-checkaddr' that returns 0 or 1 depending on whether or not the given address can be delivered at all? Bad news is that this would have horrible scalability issues unless it were a daemon. At that point, I wonder if some MTA's might support using a VRFY query against the LMTP daemon before beginning the delivery process, thus removing the need for a separate daemon or database interface. Aaron _______________________________________________ DBmail mailing list DBmail@dbmail.org https://mailman.fastxs.nl/mailman/listinfo/dbmail
