On Sat, Jul 05, 2025 at 10:08:12AM -0400, Wietse Venema via Postfix-users wrote:
> > I don't think this is a sound feature to add, it would be misunderstood
> > by naive users.
>
> This reminds me of a similar concern that we had in mail delivering
> contexts. In the mail receiving context, the solution would be to
> implement smtpd_delivery_status_filter, similar in purpose to
> smtp_delivery_status_filter (the initial problem there was how to
> make Postfix more aggressive about TLS handshake failures).
>
> This should be feasible because all SMTP server responses are
> formatted in one place. When the filter is implemented as a regexp
> map, this also provides a maximal amount of rope to shoot yourself
> in the foot with.
>
> There are some details to decide, like how this would interact with
> smtpd_reject_footer (and smtpd_reject_footer_maps); and there have
> to be guard rails (one cannot change reject into accept, or vice
> versa).
Yes, just in case I checked there's no such setting before replying. I
am not sure it is warranted, too easy to misuse. Though I do see it is
a "delivery" status filter, not a reply filter, so likely can only
intercede to modify bad news reported by cleanup(8), rather than
erroneusly upgrade tempfail access(5) verdicts to hard errors. That
might be somewhat safer, given the narrower scope, but I remain
unconvinced this is needed.
--
Viktor. 🇺🇦 Слава Україні!
_______________________________________________
Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@postfix.org
To unsubscribe send an email to postfix-users-le...@postfix.org
