Re: check_badrcptto, to prevent backscatter

Tim Meadowcroft wrote:
>=20
> On Thursday 10 March 2011 18:06:04 Robert Spier wrote:
> > Ask Bj=F8rn Hansen wrote:
> > > On Mar 10, 2011, at 6:49, Matt Sergeant wrote:
> > > > Should we have plugins/qmail and plugins/postfix dirs?
> > >=20
> > > I like that idea.
> >=20
> > I'm not sure I do.  The existing directories don't really line up that
> > way, and I don't think we're going to have a huge number of
> > postfix/qmail split plugins.  So I see this more as a suffix.
> >=20
> > I wouldn't mind moving these into some sort of directory (maybe rcpt?)
> > but moving plugins is hard, because everyone needs to update their
> > config/plugins file.
>=20
> Are you just talking about the plugins config file understanding names as=
 paths=20
> rather than as simply filenames (and presumably config files mirroring th=
e same=20
> structure) - I would see this as a good thing (I can put my specific plug=
ins=20
> into local/ or similar, and symlinks can be used if I want to be fancy) ?=
 I=20
> presume you could leave all existing plugins in the "root" but suggest=20
> migrating them over time...

No.  The plugins config already understands directories just fine.
And recent versions of qpsmtpd support a config file to set the plugin
roots:

qpsmtpd]$ cat config/plugin_dirs=20
/home/smtp/qpsmtpd/plugins.site
/home/smtp/qpsmtpd/plugins

I was disagreeing with the proposed taxonomy of having a qmail and
postfix directory, as it doesn't really fit with what we have right
now:

plugins]$ find . -type d
=2E
./async
./async/queue
./virus
./queue
./logging
./auth
./ident

-R