On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 11:58:52PM +0100, mouss wrote:
> I would suggest separating relay control from other checks. something like
>
> smtpd_relay_restrictions =
> permit_mynetworks
> permit_sasl_authenticated
This has been proposed before.
http://archives.neohapsis.com/archives/postfix/2006-05/0598.html
Perhaps some day, it would be a major change, and the question is whether
it is worth the effort if it is only an interim design. When you change
something this big, the new feature should be stable for a long time.
Changing the interface with every release becomes unpopular with users.
So the current design for all its flaws is stable, and has proved
reasonably flexible. A new design would need a lot of scrutiny to make
sure we have a solid solution good for another decade of releases.
One could, take this to the extreme and introduce a new (not replacement,
but alternative) SMTP server called "pysmtpd" that bolts a Python
interpreter into Postfix, and provides all the restriction building blocks
(various lookups, ...) as functions in the Python interpreter. Then, in
"pysmtpd" you'd tweak Python code to make access decisions. There'd be
of stock rules and a gentle configuration syntax for non-programmers,
but the underlying rule engine would be a full programming language
extensible by module writers and advanced users.
Lots of other possibilities. Which approach is right?
--
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:majord...@postfix.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.
