Re: [vchkpw] just noticed something with chkuser ....

2004-11-26 Thread Charles Sprickman
On Fri, 26 Nov 2004, Rick Macdougall wrote: I assume some ISPs here use vpopmail and also need to do backup mx for customers who run their own mailservers. Without the chkuser patch, simply adding those customer domains to morercpthosts would allow us to relay for them. With chkuser, anything

Re: [vchkpw] just noticed something with chkuser ....

2004-11-26 Thread Rick Macdougall
Charles Sprickman wrote: On Thu, 25 Nov 2004, tonix (Antonio Nati) wrote: I'll follow this suggestion: keeping all non RFC options commented (exclude format control, exclude MX control, accept NULL sender, etc.), and improving documentation. Here's another feature request for you... I assume so

Re: [vchkpw] just noticed something with chkuser ....

2004-11-26 Thread Charles Sprickman
On Thu, 25 Nov 2004, tonix (Antonio Nati) wrote: I'll follow this suggestion: keeping all non RFC options commented (exclude format control, exclude MX control, accept NULL sender, etc.), and improving documentation. Here's another feature request for you... I assume some ISPs here use vpopmail a

Re: [vchkpw] just noticed something with chkuser ....

2004-11-25 Thread tonix (Antonio Nati)
At 18.34 24/11/2004, you wrote: On Wednesday 24 November 2004 04:17 am, tonix (Antonio Nati) wrote: > CORRECTION TO THE PREVIOUS MESSAGE. > > > CHKUSER_ENABLE_NULL_SENDER is in 2.0.7. > > This version may be considered stable, despite of its "devel" attribute. I tried to use it.. looks like I need

Re: [vchkpw] just noticed something with chkuser ....

2004-11-24 Thread Walter Souto R. Junior
Perhaps the code could be split up into chkuser, which does its purpose in validating local recipients, and another patch that attempts to perform some checks on the envelope sender. I agree with that. chkuser is great, but in some particular cases the only desirable feature is to validating

RE: [vchkpw] just noticed something with chkuser ....

2004-11-24 Thread Jason Wilkinson
Jeremy Kitchen wrote: >> >> One general question, before I publish 2.0.8: >> >> Does it make sense to have format checking enabled as default? > > I think it's beyond the scope of the functionality of the chkuser > patch, to be honest. > > Perhaps the code could be split up into chkuser, which

Re: [vchkpw] just noticed something with chkuser ....

2004-11-24 Thread Jeremy Kitchen
On Wednesday 24 November 2004 04:17 am, tonix (Antonio Nati) wrote: > CORRECTION TO THE PREVIOUS MESSAGE. > > > CHKUSER_ENABLE_NULL_SENDER is in 2.0.7. > > This version may be considered stable, despite of its "devel" attribute. I tried to use it.. looks like I need to patch with 2.0.6 and then pa

Re: [vchkpw] just noticed something with chkuser ....

2004-11-24 Thread tonix (Antonio Nati)
CORRECTION TO THE PREVIOUS MESSAGE. CHKUSER_ENABLE_NULL_SENDER is in 2.0.7. This version may be considered stable, despite of its "devel" attribute. On next days I'll publish a 2.0.8 "release", and update online documentation. 2.0.8 that will probably be the definitive stable chkuser, with the mo

Re: [vchkpw] just noticed something with chkuser ....

2004-11-24 Thread tonix (Antonio Nati)
Jeremy, you should add also CHKUSER_ENABLE_NULL_SENDER. When CHKUSER_SENDER_FORMAT or CHKUSER_SENDER_MX are defined, CHKUSER_ENABLE_NULL_SENDER will exclude NULL SENDERS from those checkings. This is the new default in the last distributions, after CHKUSER_ENABLE_NULL_SENDER has been added:

Re: [vchkpw] just noticed something with chkuser ....

2004-11-23 Thread Remo Mattei
M Subject: Re: [vchkpw] just noticed something with chkuser

Re: [vchkpw] just noticed something with chkuser ....

2004-11-23 Thread Rick Macdougall
Jeremy Kitchen wrote: On Tuesday 23 November 2004 04:53 pm, Rick Macdougall wrote: CHKUSER_ENABLE_NULL_SENDER_WITH_TCPREMOTEHOST 2.0.5 defined Enables accepting null sender "<>" from hosts which have a name associated to their IP oh, and we don't do reverse dns lookups.. that would explai

Re: [vchkpw] just noticed something with chkuser ....

2004-11-23 Thread Jeremy Kitchen
On Tuesday 23 November 2004 05:30 pm, Jeremy Kitchen wrote: > On Tuesday 23 November 2004 04:53 pm, Rick Macdougall wrote: > > Jeremy Kitchen wrote: > > > mail from: <> > > > 571 sorry, sender address has invalid format (#5.7.1 - chkuser) > > > > > > HUH? > > > > > > this is fixed in a newer versio

Re: [vchkpw] just noticed something with chkuser ....

2004-11-23 Thread Rick Macdougall
Jeremy Kitchen wrote: mail from: <> 571 sorry, sender address has invalid format (#5.7.1 - chkuser) HUH? this is fixed in a newer version I hope? Hi, Is CHKUSER_ENABLE_NULL_SENDER_WITH_TCPREMOTEHOST defined in your config ? From the manual CHKUSER_ENABLE_NULL_SENDER_WITH_TCPREMOTEHOST 2.0.5 defin

Re: [vchkpw] just noticed something with chkuser ....

2004-11-23 Thread Jeremy Kitchen
On Tuesday 23 November 2004 04:53 pm, Rick Macdougall wrote: > Jeremy Kitchen wrote: > > mail from: <> > > 571 sorry, sender address has invalid format (#5.7.1 - chkuser) > > > > HUH? > > > > this is fixed in a newer version I hope? > > Hi, > > Is CHKUSER_ENABLE_NULL_SENDER_WITH_TCPREMOTEHOST defin

[vchkpw] just noticed something with chkuser ....

2004-11-23 Thread Jeremy Kitchen
mail from: <> 571 sorry, sender address has invalid format (#5.7.1 - chkuser) HUH? this is fixed in a newer version I hope? -Jeremy -- Jeremy Kitchen ++ Systems Administrator ++ Inter7 Internet Technologies, Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED] ++ www.inter7.com ++ 866.528.3530 ++ 815.776.9465 int'l