On Jan 2, 2009, at 2:17 PM, mouss wrote:
Jeff Weinberger a écrit :
On Jan 2, 2009, at 9:20 AM, mouss wrote:
Jeff Weinberger a écrit :
It's definitely my set up. I don't use LMTP to pass the message to
dspam, I use a transport called "dspam" that uses pipe. That means
there's no S/LMTP dialog, just the message itself passed as STDIN.
so _you_ are not passing the envelope sender to dspam.
Consider running dspam in "relay mode":
postfix --(LMTP)--> dspam --(SMTP)--> postfix
I have to move dspam to use LMTP and then move it to a before-queue
why do you want to run it in pre-queue mode? This is not needed
and is
not simple to setup.
Is there a reason why you keep adding yahoo groups after I remove them
fro CC? This is starting to annoy me...
Sorry!! I was having problems with my messages not posting. I will
stop adding :)
and by the way, disable the X-DSPAM-Factors header. dspam doesn't
encode
it, which results in things like:
X-DSPAM-Factors: 27,
...
a+écrit, 0.01000,
and this is not a valid header.
OK thanks!
If I understand your diagram, then the content_filter would look
like:
content_filter=lmtp:unix:/path/to/dspam args
No.
content_filter=lmtp:inet:127.0.0.1:10024
where the 10024 is the same port used in dspam.conf:
ServerPort 10024
of course, dspam must be running in daemon mode.
dspam is running in daemon mode. This makes sense as a setup.
The example in the dspam docs for postfix shows
content_filter=lmtp:unix:/path/to/dspam.sock
which is why I thought unix: instead of inet:
is there any difference, other than performance?
On a related question (if more broad): some content_filter examples I
see use content_filter in main.cf and some as "-o content_filter=..."
in master.cf.
I understand from prior conversations here that you can't override
content filters, they are global. (yes?)
So is there an advantage/disadvantage to specifying the content filter
in main.cf vs. master.cf?
and that might pass through the envelope information (I'm not
convinced,
but if dspam can do it, that would be how).
LMTP is similar to SMTP, and dspam can run as an LMTP server (this is
configured in dspam.conf).
But since dspam can speak LMTP and SMTP
dspam has a server and a client. so which speaks what?
if we are talking about the server part:
$ cd dspam-3.8.0/src
$ cat daemon.c
..
input = daemon_expect(TTX, "LHLO");
if (input == NULL)
goto CLOSE;
..
it wants LHLO (which is for LMTP), not HELO or EHLO. so no smtp there.
why would an smtpd proxy be hard
to set up? It would certainly avoid the bcc issues, etc.
I don't understand why you mix pre-queue and bcc. maybe you confuse
pre-queue with a "not simple content filter"?
I am new to pre-queue filtering and am clearly still confused :)
you had asked:
why do you want to run it in pre-queue mode? This is not needed
and is
not simple to setu
so I thought it might be hard.
It's not important for now...getting dspam working as LMTP will be
fine (assuming it passes along all the right information once it works)
Thank you!!
that I"
experiences by having the message run through postfix twice. After
reading through SMTPD_PROXY_README, it seems like a bit of a
challenge
to make it work, but not that hard...what do you think might be
difficult?
Thanks for all your help - over the course of thi dialog I've
learned a
lot about postfix and have become more aware of and proficient with
parts I knew little about. This has been very helpful.
content filter so that this workaround becomes unnecessary, but
until I
go to make those changes, this will suffice.
I'm not completely convinced that dspam will work seamlessly as a
before-queue content filter, so I'll have to do some testing to
see how
well that works and whether it can do what I need and hand fully
formed
messages with SMTP dialog information back to postfix.
