> > * Is it useful/desirable to parse the message-id field (into left and
> > right parts)?
Pretty low on my priority list.
> > * Is it useful/desirable to parse the Received field into name/value
> > pairs?
If you can, yes. Otherwise, we would have to do some on our own. I've used
regex to do
Ted,
> I have attached a matcher we have found useful in filtering spam
> based on URI's in the body against the DNS-based SURBL list.
If you intend for us to use this with JAMES, would you please upload it as
an attachment in JIRA, being sure to check the box that authorizes us to use
it?
> By the way, did I miss a patch where you changed the bounce
> mailet? I'm seeing the DSNStatus inner class still there, as
> well as the new copy of it that is in mail/dsn/DSNStatus.
>
> --- Noel
My DSNBounce is totally different from the one in trunk. Actually I named my
bounce handli
Stefano,
> I wouldn't like the SMTP server to read the "code" that an handler returns
> and decide how to behave dependently on the first char of that code.
I agree with that concern, which isn't generally exposed in the my version
of the fast-fail proposal. In the case where I show a general ca
--On Sunday, June 05, 2005 8:38 PM -0400 "Noel J. Bergman"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Most attachment types are filtered out by our mail filters. Very
little can get through on most ASF mailing lists. Your attachment
didn't make it. Please post text e-mail.
And eventually all of these propos
I could work on Fast-fail, especially since I've worked on it in my company
:-)
However, it seems a lot of ppl are already interested and quite capable.
Would you rather me to focus on clustering or have several ppl proposes
fast-fail?
nicolas
2005/6/4, Noel J. Bergman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
Jason Webb and other JAMES comitters,
I would like to work on this project. I am a junior computer science student
at Baylor University. I hope that you can point in me in a direction where I
can learn a bit more about what this project entails and thereby decide if I
have anything to offer.
--
On Sat, 2005-06-04 at 16:25 -0400, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
> First, it isn't part of JAMES, and this is core functionality that we have
> wanted to add (discussion on the list goes back several years, but it hasn't
> been of the highest priority). Second, james-ha is under the LGPL, which is
> not
> your configuration example:
>
>
>
>
> [...]
> 220
>
>
> [..]
>
> 5xx
>
>
> 220
>
> [..]
I just added ENHANCEDSTATUSCODES support to james smtp server. So you should
take care to add a DSN status to every smtp reply and not only
Alexander,
your configuration example:
MAIL FROM
accept
220
...
Looks just fine, very close to what I imagined.
What I can't understand is how you could use "Matchers" before you have a
complete "Mail".
My own idea config would look
Noel wrote:
> Although the scope of "validation" covers that neccessary to determine
that
> we will accept the responsibility for delivery, which can lead to some
other
> things. For example, I would probably configure virtual user mapping
within
> the protocol handler, which would allow me to r
Yup, in our server i decided to just catch Throwables from the bounce
attempt (if a bounce fails, tough!)
Still, it seems a little concerning that the server may get low on memory,
then attempt to deliver a reasonably sized mail (within server limits) and
fail, and consequently keep repeating (and
> * Is it useful/desirable to parse the message-id field (into left and
> right parts)? I get the impression that a relatively high number of
> mail messages have syntactically illegal message-id values--two @ signs
> seems to be a particularly common offense. Since the message-id is
> really int
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JAMES-369?page=all ]
Vincenzo Gianferrari Pini closed JAMES-369:
---
I'm satisfied :-)
> Always announce AUTH capability to clients
> --
>
> Key: JAMES-369
>
14 matches
Mail list logo
