ietf-clear
[Top] [All Lists]

[ietf-clear] CSV implementation for Exim 4.

2004-12-10 15:55:20
On Fri, 2004-12-10 at 15:31, David Woodhouse wrote:
On Fri, 10 Dec 2004, Douglas Otis wrote:
I could suggest the Port field being zero might be excluded from your
comparison, as this field may change to include general policy
assertions.  With that in mind, it might be better to ignore this field.

Currently, if the Port field is non-zero then we acknowledge that 
something's going on that we don't understand (or the domain owner screwed 
up publishing the record), and we err on the side of caution by accepting 
the HELO. Should I be rejecting mail if I don't understand the meaning of 
the Port field? Can you promise me that there will _never_ be a 
definition of the Port field which means I shouldn't really reject?

The current discussion has not concluded on the meaning of any
additional information, or that there will be additional information for
the matter.  This information was relating to whether CSV should have
been expected, when the specific CSV record for the HELO is not found. 
This information, as it is currently proposed, does not directly apply
to a specific HELO label, but to the supposition of there being other
records as a type of policy statement.  

If you view this in that light, and consider this information to be
essentially independent of the CSV function, then ignoring the Port
field interpretation should be a safe bet.  At this point, we may only
officially require that this field be ignored.  The Weight field
provides the immediate information regarding the authorization of the
HELO and that is not expected to change.

I expect to be corrected if I am wrong. : )

When you have this script working, could you send me a copy with your 
copyright statements and I'll be happy to publish this on the
csvmail.org site.  I want to be sure to provide appropriate accolades.

http://david.woodhou.se/exim-csv-acl.txt has the current version with the 
localhost exception and with a couple of lines of licence and 
documentation. I'm away for the weekend and on GPRS, so can't sanely test 
any changes to make it more relaxed about the Port field until Monday. 
Tony may be inclined to play though :)

Dave Crocker contacted me and said that he would like to post this
directly from the mipassoc.org/CSV web page.  I guess we needed to work
out the details on who manages this stuff.  I thank you and Dave thanks
you. : )

-Doug