[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: connection level whitelist/blacklists anyone?
From: |
Cowles, Steve |
Subject: |
RE: connection level whitelist/blacklists anyone? |
Date: |
Thu, 13 Mar 2003 05:24:13 -0600 |
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Nigel Horne
> Sent: Thursday, March 13, 2003 3:36 AM
> Subject: Re: connection level whitelist/blacklists anyone?
>
>
> On Thursday 13 Mar 2003 5:43 am, Chuck Yerkes wrote:
>
> > Using the access map model:
> > SPAMASS:127.0.0.1 ALLOW
> > SPAMASS:127::1 ALLOW
> > SPAMASS:192.168 ALLOW
>
> The patch uploaded to the spamass-milter website has addresses
> hardcoded, I always wanted to improve it, so maybe I'll give
> that an go and upload a new path.
I'm I following this thread correctly? This seems like just the type of
spamass-milter enhancement I've been looking for.
Background: In addition to using spamass-milter/sendmail as a frontend for
my exchange server, my mail server is also a backup MX for another domain
using the DSMTP mailer. i.e. In mailertable:
mydomain.com esmtp:exchange.mydomain.com
backup_domain.com dsmtp:mail.backup_domain.com
The only problem with this setup is...
1) By design, spamass-milter is called before sendmail chooses the mailer -
so SA is run against all e-mails queued for backup_domain.com.
2) The primary MX for the backup domain (mail.backup_domain.com) also runs
SA against a totally different set of local.cf rules. So any e-mails
recieved during the ETRN are not processed by the primary MX.
It would be nice if I could configure spamass-milter to NOT run SA against
any e-mails for the backup domain and just let sendmail simply queue these
e-mails normally using the specified mailer. Using the access map would be
perfect fit. i.e.
SPAMASS:backup_domain.com NO_SA
or something along those lines.
Am I totally off base here in my understanding of this thread/proposed
feature? I hope not.
thanks
Steve Cowles
Re: connection level whitelist/blacklists anyone?, Sam Robertson, 2003/03/12
Re: connection level whitelist/blacklists anyone?, Nigel Horne, 2003/03/12
RE: connection level whitelist/blacklists anyone?,
Cowles, Steve <=