Incomplete error messages from bounced emails?

[Hugo Osvaldo Barrera]

I recently had some messages bounce from gmail.com. I went up to their forums
to ask what's up, and on the replies, it was pointed out to my that gsmtpd
actually sends a rather verbose explanation message when it bounces messages
(eg: if it's spam, invalid return address, blacklisted address, etc).

Here's the thread were this was pointed to me. I'm guessing that sending an
email from a non-static IP range is enough to trigger a bounce harmelessly:
https://productforums.google.com/forum/#!msg/gmail/SQQAbew5tfE/-ue8aO07sf8J

Can somebody confirm if these explanations are being dropped by smtpd, if
they're non-standard, or what's going on?

Cheers, thanks,

[Giovanni Bechis]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera
I recently had some messages bounce from gmail.com. I went up to their forums
to ask what's up, and on the replies, it was pointed out to my that gsmtpd
actually sends a rather verbose explanation message when it bounces messages
(eg: if it's spam, invalid return address, blacklisted address, etc).
Here's the thread were this was pointed to me. I'm guessing that sending an
https://productforums.google.com/forum/#!msg/gmail/SQQAbew5tfE/-ue8aO07sf8J
Can somebody confirm if these explanations are being dropped by smtpd, if
they're non-standard, or what's going on?

gmail warnings are splitted in two or more lines and smtpd logs only one of them.
See https://github.com/OpenSMTPD/OpenSMTPD/issues/365 for details.
Cheers
Giovanni
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJT93C6AAoJEI7Sc79XDlKKLWkH+we5rr8BJrF86lk81z01wTsf
xNGjo/2lly6zuIwYlknmeRqoJLUNOgj5xJrKIMen3YkveOdcq/aLl3yxBLN4pH9j
cU/60mLohNWAzpbX4KbFDPxlbpn7SMkxxZ3asfWgcRjPt7LX2MBO1l5qw9umk8VZ
v60OCJGsSxv49ps+KyoBh0fDxqXJordR6aCmVix83Kc6rTCKeYcKzAyGSqSI3JqF
DKFQra25z8lR/kvB6vuQmq+cFUejWDc7p0st0Rq4WGRUwq7ZpiEf7IjUSLhxbiYL
736oUdwW9MlRwr+GWPaK3UaCXXE6z2Tj4IxzW4WGbiWsDY0Y02SgcPpODMTp2GY=
=9pqx
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[Hugo Osvaldo Barrera]

Post by Giovanni Bechis

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera
I recently had some messages bounce from gmail.com. I went up to their forums
to ask what's up, and on the replies, it was pointed out to my that gsmtpd
actually sends a rather verbose explanation message when it bounces messages
(eg: if it's spam, invalid return address, blacklisted address, etc).
Here's the thread were this was pointed to me. I'm guessing that sending an
https://productforums.google.com/forum/#!msg/gmail/SQQAbew5tfE/-ue8aO07sf8J
Can somebody confirm if these explanations are being dropped by smtpd, if
they're non-standard, or what's going on?

gmail warnings are splitted in two or more lines and smtpd logs only one of them.
See https://github.com/OpenSMTPD/OpenSMTPD/issues/365 for details.
Cheers
Giovanni
--

Looks like the devs were expecting this to make it to the list and it did not.
Can we bring that up now? Are there any downsides to implementing this?

[Gilles Chehade]

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Giovanni Bechis

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera
I recently had some messages bounce from gmail.com. I went up to their forums
to ask what's up, and on the replies, it was pointed out to my that gsmtpd
actually sends a rather verbose explanation message when it bounces messages
(eg: if it's spam, invalid return address, blacklisted address, etc).
Here's the thread were this was pointed to me. I'm guessing that sending an
https://productforums.google.com/forum/#!msg/gmail/SQQAbew5tfE/-ue8aO07sf8J
Can somebody confirm if these explanations are being dropped by smtpd, if
they're non-standard, or what's going on?

gmail warnings are splitted in two or more lines and smtpd logs only one of them.
See https://github.com/OpenSMTPD/OpenSMTPD/issues/365 for details.
Cheers
Giovanni
--

Looks like the devs were expecting this to make it to the list and it did not.
Can we bring that up now? Are there any downsides to implementing this?

Yes, we were waiting for the discussion to come up.

There's a downside to implementing this:

Imagine you create an account for me on your server.
I then decide to go rogue and setup a remote MX which will reply with
a HUGE response, say 1000s of lines.

We need to log atomically so:

a- log line can't be written until we're done reading response;
b- session needs to remember every line of the response until done reading;


This leads to some issues:

First, it means that we need to buffer data at the session level.
That amount of data is unknown and if I'm an asshole, I will send tons
of outgoing mails to my rogue server so that there are tons of sessions
buffering tons of data.

Then, do we really want to log the entire response ?
Every time I will send a mail to one recipient, it will fill your logs
with thousands of lines. Without even considering the speed at which I
can amplify your logs filling, what worries me is that it can turn log
files into unreadable garbage where one useful information is lost in
a heap of useless logs.


I understand the problem, I also face it daily but logging all is not
the way to go. We need to find a proper balance, let the discussion
begin ;-)

[Hugo Osvaldo Barrera]

Post by Gilles Chehade

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Giovanni Bechis

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera
I recently had some messages bounce from gmail.com. I went up to their forums
to ask what's up, and on the replies, it was pointed out to my that gsmtpd
actually sends a rather verbose explanation message when it bounces messages
(eg: if it's spam, invalid return address, blacklisted address, etc).
Here's the thread were this was pointed to me. I'm guessing that sending an
https://productforums.google.com/forum/#!msg/gmail/SQQAbew5tfE/-ue8aO07sf8J
Can somebody confirm if these explanations are being dropped by smtpd, if
they're non-standard, or what's going on?

gmail warnings are splitted in two or more lines and smtpd logs only one of them.
See https://github.com/OpenSMTPD/OpenSMTPD/issues/365 for details.
Cheers
Giovanni
--

Looks like the devs were expecting this to make it to the list and it did not.
Can we bring that up now? Are there any downsides to implementing this?

Yes, we were waiting for the discussion to come up.
Imagine you create an account for me on your server.
I then decide to go rogue and setup a remote MX which will reply with
a HUGE response, say 1000s of lines.
a- log line can't be written until we're done reading response;
b- session needs to remember every line of the response until done reading;

Can't we not-log all of it, but keep the message and send it to the original
sender?

The logs could be something like:

"550 Error... [25 more lines trimmed]"

While the sender of the original email get the bounce email with the entire
content (all 25 lines in the above example".

Post by Gilles Chehade
First, it means that we need to buffer data at the session level.
That amount of data is unknown and if I'm an asshole, I will send tons
of outgoing mails to my rogue server so that there are tons of sessions
buffering tons of data.

Doesn't something similar happen when emails are received? Can't we deal with
this in a similar way?

Post by Gilles Chehade
Then, do we really want to log the entire response ?

No, I'd suggest trimming it by default. Or a knob to configure this (though
that sounds like more work, and, personally, I don't care about logging it. As
long as the sender gets the full error, it's enough).

Post by Gilles Chehade
Every time I will send a mail to one recipient, it will fill your logs
with thousands of lines. Without even considering the speed at which I
can amplify your logs filling, what worries me is that it can turn log
files into unreadable garbage where one useful information is lost in
a heap of useless logs.
I understand the problem, I also face it daily but logging all is not
the way to go. We need to find a proper balance, let the discussion
begin ;-)
--
Gilles Chehade
--

To add this up:
I believe that the best is to log only a single line (and mention "timmed N
lines"), but return the entire error to the sender. Maybe the last bit can be
configurable as well?

[Giovanni Bechis]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Gilles Chehade

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Giovanni Bechis

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera
I recently had some messages bounce from gmail.com. I went up to their forums
to ask what's up, and on the replies, it was pointed out to my that gsmtpd
actually sends a rather verbose explanation message when it bounces messages
(eg: if it's spam, invalid return address, blacklisted address, etc).
Here's the thread were this was pointed to me. I'm guessing that sending an
https://productforums.google.com/forum/#!msg/gmail/SQQAbew5tfE/-ue8aO07sf8J
Can somebody confirm if these explanations are being dropped by smtpd, if
they're non-standard, or what's going on?

gmail warnings are splitted in two or more lines and smtpd logs only one of them.
See https://github.com/OpenSMTPD/OpenSMTPD/issues/365 for details.
Cheers
Giovanni
--

Looks like the devs were expecting this to make it to the list and it did not.
Can we bring that up now? Are there any downsides to implementing this?

Yes, we were waiting for the discussion to come up.
Imagine you create an account for me on your server.
I then decide to go rogue and setup a remote MX which will reply with
a HUGE response, say 1000s of lines.
a- log line can't be written until we're done reading response;
b- session needs to remember every line of the response until done reading;

Can't we not-log all of it, but keep the message and send it to the original
sender?
"550 Error... [25 more lines trimmed]"

I would like to have at maximum 5/6 lines of response on my log to be able to found if a problem is recurring and which could be the original cause.
Cheers
Giovanni
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJUCfFIAAoJEI7Sc79XDlKKIOgIAJUFm5US9HxXVPAsB8nGTwGH
t7fDfqqbn+Uuhpnilh/zWznrjqmoA1QeJLdvSo31T/mu2hz3EJ8IauLscYnkvCA3
ZB0PjSGFDec1B6cJ3LoyWscSIn/cn1xn/4cUDDAupsyMelIdmfAL4xNOupm073wC
hkEcFqPpqfnTU5aQMV3H/hG7Xs/1jMqjWtNF3IU+gVUfWfilYnu+QAwJq6YBVGFX
lhJn4Eqj4rAOeQfr0jAY1qvbqBcsCDrpfgrHW4LYiNMjrDcfUQ8tkoWjfM+73FY2
iWVmEFvuyybanHjmTGysue4ssAOmrSmot3tw2pAWIRY9Gk0XlL6M17EvGgKhJPg=
=/Zip
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[Hugo Osvaldo Barrera]

Post by Giovanni Bechis

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Gilles Chehade

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Giovanni Bechis

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera
I recently had some messages bounce from gmail.com. I went up to their forums
to ask what's up, and on the replies, it was pointed out to my that gsmtpd
actually sends a rather verbose explanation message when it bounces messages
(eg: if it's spam, invalid return address, blacklisted address, etc).
Here's the thread were this was pointed to me. I'm guessing that sending an
https://productforums.google.com/forum/#!msg/gmail/SQQAbew5tfE/-ue8aO07sf8J
Can somebody confirm if these explanations are being dropped by smtpd, if
they're non-standard, or what's going on?

gmail warnings are splitted in two or more lines and smtpd logs only one of them.
See https://github.com/OpenSMTPD/OpenSMTPD/issues/365 for details.
Cheers
Giovanni
--

Looks like the devs were expecting this to make it to the list and it did not.
Can we bring that up now? Are there any downsides to implementing this?

Yes, we were waiting for the discussion to come up.
Imagine you create an account for me on your server.
I then decide to go rogue and setup a remote MX which will reply with
a HUGE response, say 1000s of lines.
a- log line can't be written until we're done reading response;
b- session needs to remember every line of the response until done reading;

Can't we not-log all of it, but keep the message and send it to the original
sender?
"550 Error... [25 more lines trimmed]"

I would like to have at maximum 5/6 lines of response on my log to be able to found if a problem is recurring and which could be the original cause.
Cheers
Giovanni
--

It looks like this thread died fast, and nothing was decided.
Is there any interest on implementing this/making it configurable?

Would these errors be outputed if smtpd is run with "-v"?

Cheers,

[Gilles Chehade]

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera
It looks like this thread died fast, and nothing was decided.
Is there any interest on implementing this/making it configurable?
Would these errors be outputed if smtpd is run with "-v"?
Cheers,

Nope, not dead :-)

Eric and I are busy for a few more days at work before resuming hacking
on OpenSMTPD.

I've only started processing bug reports and mails a couple days ago ;)

[Gilles Chehade]

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Giovanni Bechis

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Gilles Chehade

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Giovanni Bechis

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera
I recently had some messages bounce from gmail.com. I went up to their forums
to ask what's up, and on the replies, it was pointed out to my that gsmtpd
actually sends a rather verbose explanation message when it bounces messages
(eg: if it's spam, invalid return address, blacklisted address, etc).
Here's the thread were this was pointed to me. I'm guessing that sending an
https://productforums.google.com/forum/#!msg/gmail/SQQAbew5tfE/-ue8aO07sf8J
Can somebody confirm if these explanations are being dropped by smtpd, if
they're non-standard, or what's going on?

gmail warnings are splitted in two or more lines and smtpd logs only one of them.
See https://github.com/OpenSMTPD/OpenSMTPD/issues/365 for details.
Cheers
Giovanni
--

Looks like the devs were expecting this to make it to the list and it did not.
Can we bring that up now? Are there any downsides to implementing this?

Yes, we were waiting for the discussion to come up.
Imagine you create an account for me on your server.
I then decide to go rogue and setup a remote MX which will reply with
a HUGE response, say 1000s of lines.
a- log line can't be written until we're done reading response;
b- session needs to remember every line of the response until done reading;

Can't we not-log all of it, but keep the message and send it to the original
sender?
"550 Error... [25 more lines trimmed]"

I would like to have at maximum 5/6 lines of response on my log to be able to found if a problem is recurring and which could be the original cause.
Cheers
Giovanni
--

It looks like this thread died fast, and nothing was decided.
Is there any interest on implementing this/making it configurable?
Would these errors be outputed if smtpd is run with "-v"?
Cheers,

Ok, what about the following:

- we read n lines, strip their newline and concat them;
- if reply was > n line, we log that output was truncated and needs to
be analyzed through smtpctl trace

Would that be ok for everyone ?

[Hugo Osvaldo Barrera]

Post by Gilles Chehade

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Giovanni Bechis

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Gilles Chehade

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Giovanni Bechis

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera
I recently had some messages bounce from gmail.com. I went up to their forums
to ask what's up, and on the replies, it was pointed out to my that gsmtpd
actually sends a rather verbose explanation message when it bounces messages
(eg: if it's spam, invalid return address, blacklisted address, etc).
Here's the thread were this was pointed to me. I'm guessing that sending an
https://productforums.google.com/forum/#!msg/gmail/SQQAbew5tfE/-ue8aO07sf8J
Can somebody confirm if these explanations are being dropped by smtpd, if
they're non-standard, or what's going on?

gmail warnings are splitted in two or more lines and smtpd logs only one of them.
See https://github.com/OpenSMTPD/OpenSMTPD/issues/365 for details.
Cheers
Giovanni
--

Looks like the devs were expecting this to make it to the list and it did not.
Can we bring that up now? Are there any downsides to implementing this?

Yes, we were waiting for the discussion to come up.
Imagine you create an account for me on your server.
I then decide to go rogue and setup a remote MX which will reply with
a HUGE response, say 1000s of lines.
a- log line can't be written until we're done reading response;
b- session needs to remember every line of the response until done reading;

Can't we not-log all of it, but keep the message and send it to the original
sender?
"550 Error... [25 more lines trimmed]"

I would like to have at maximum 5/6 lines of response on my log to be able to found if a problem is recurring and which could be the original cause.
Cheers
Giovanni
--

It looks like this thread died fast, and nothing was decided.
Is there any interest on implementing this/making it configurable?
Would these errors be outputed if smtpd is run with "-v"?
Cheers,

- we read n lines, strip their newline and concat them;
- if reply was > n line, we log that output was truncated and needs to
be analyzed through smtpctl trace
Would that be ok for everyone ?
--
Gilles Chehade

Sounds good to me.
Maybe some users will want this to be configurable (on/off).

[Gilles Chehade]

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Gilles Chehade

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Giovanni Bechis

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Gilles Chehade

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Giovanni Bechis

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera
I recently had some messages bounce from gmail.com. I went up to their forums
to ask what's up, and on the replies, it was pointed out to my that gsmtpd
actually sends a rather verbose explanation message when it bounces messages
(eg: if it's spam, invalid return address, blacklisted address, etc).
Here's the thread were this was pointed to me. I'm guessing that sending an
https://productforums.google.com/forum/#!msg/gmail/SQQAbew5tfE/-ue8aO07sf8J
Can somebody confirm if these explanations are being dropped by smtpd, if
they're non-standard, or what's going on?

gmail warnings are splitted in two or more lines and smtpd logs only one of them.
See https://github.com/OpenSMTPD/OpenSMTPD/issues/365 for details.
Cheers
Giovanni
--

Looks like the devs were expecting this to make it to the list and it did not.
Can we bring that up now? Are there any downsides to implementing this?

Yes, we were waiting for the discussion to come up.
Imagine you create an account for me on your server.
I then decide to go rogue and setup a remote MX which will reply with
a HUGE response, say 1000s of lines.
a- log line can't be written until we're done reading response;
b- session needs to remember every line of the response until done reading;

Can't we not-log all of it, but keep the message and send it to the original
sender?
"550 Error... [25 more lines trimmed]"

I would like to have at maximum 5/6 lines of response on my log to be able to found if a problem is recurring and which could be the original cause.
Cheers
Giovanni
--

It looks like this thread died fast, and nothing was decided.
Is there any interest on implementing this/making it configurable?
Would these errors be outputed if smtpd is run with "-v"?
Cheers,

- we read n lines, strip their newline and concat them;
- if reply was > n line, we log that output was truncated and needs to
be analyzed through smtpctl trace
Would that be ok for everyone ?
--
Gilles Chehade

Sounds good to me.
Maybe some users will want this to be configurable (on/off).

That's not something I like to do as you probably already know ;p

[Barbier, Jason]

yeah to be fair I would agree with Gilles no knob other than trace.

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Gilles Chehade

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Giovanni Bechis

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

On Sat, Aug 23, 2014 at 12:28:00PM -0300, Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Giovanni Bechis

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera
I recently had some messages bounce from gmail.com. I went

up to their forums

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Gilles Chehade

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Giovanni Bechis

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Giovanni Bechis

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera
to ask what's up, and on the replies, it was pointed out to

my that gsmtpd

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Gilles Chehade

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Giovanni Bechis

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Giovanni Bechis

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera
actually sends a rather verbose explanation message when it

bounces messages

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Gilles Chehade

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Giovanni Bechis

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Giovanni Bechis

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera
(eg: if it's spam, invalid return address, blacklisted

address, etc).

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Gilles Chehade

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Giovanni Bechis

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Giovanni Bechis

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera
Here's the thread were this was pointed to me. I'm guessing

that sending an

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Gilles Chehade

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Giovanni Bechis

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Giovanni Bechis

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera
email from a non-static IP range is enough to trigger a

https://productforums.google.com/forum/#!msg/gmail/SQQAbew5tfE/-ue8aO07sf8J

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Gilles Chehade

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Giovanni Bechis

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Giovanni Bechis

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera
Can somebody confirm if these explanations are being dropped

by smtpd, if

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Gilles Chehade

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Giovanni Bechis

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Giovanni Bechis

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera
they're non-standard, or what's going on?

gmail warnings are splitted in two or more lines and smtpd

logs only one of them.

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Gilles Chehade

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Giovanni Bechis

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Giovanni Bechis
See https://github.com/OpenSMTPD/OpenSMTPD/issues/365 for

details.

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Gilles Chehade

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Giovanni Bechis

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Giovanni Bechis
Cheers
Giovanni
--
You received this mail because you are subscribed to

Looks like the devs were expecting this to make it to the list

and it did not.

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Gilles Chehade

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Giovanni Bechis

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera
Can we bring that up now? Are there any downsides to

implementing this?

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Gilles Chehade

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Giovanni Bechis

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Yes, we were waiting for the discussion to come up.
Imagine you create an account for me on your server.
I then decide to go rogue and setup a remote MX which will

reply with

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Gilles Chehade

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Giovanni Bechis

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

a HUGE response, say 1000s of lines.
a- log line can't be written until we're done reading response;
b- session needs to remember every line of the response until

done reading;

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Gilles Chehade

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Giovanni Bechis

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera
Can't we not-log all of it, but keep the message and send it to

the original

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Gilles Chehade

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Giovanni Bechis

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera
sender?
"550 Error... [25 more lines trimmed]"

I would like to have at maximum 5/6 lines of response on my log to

be able to found if a problem is recurring and which could be the original
cause.

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Gilles Chehade

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Giovanni Bechis
Cheers
Giovanni
--
You received this mail because you are subscribed to

It looks like this thread died fast, and nothing was decided.
Is there any interest on implementing this/making it configurable?
Would these errors be outputed if smtpd is run with "-v"?
Cheers,

- we read n lines, strip their newline and concat them;
- if reply was > n line, we log that output was truncated and needs to
be analyzed through smtpctl trace
Would that be ok for everyone ?
--
Gilles Chehade
https://www.poolp.org

@poolpOrg

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera
Sounds good to me.
Maybe some users will want this to be configurable (on/off).

That's not something I like to do as you probably already know ;p
--
Gilles Chehade
--

[Gilles Chehade]

Eric has agreed with the idea, unless there are objections this is how we're
going to handle this issue.

Speak out now if you dislike the idea :-)

Gilles

Post by Barbier, Jason
yeah to be fair I would agree with Gilles no knob other than trace.

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Gilles Chehade

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Giovanni Bechis

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

On Sat, Aug 23, 2014 at 12:28:00PM -0300, Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Giovanni Bechis

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera
I recently had some messages bounce from gmail.com. I went

up to their forums

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Gilles Chehade

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Giovanni Bechis

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Giovanni Bechis

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera
to ask what's up, and on the replies, it was pointed out to

my that gsmtpd

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Gilles Chehade

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Giovanni Bechis

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Giovanni Bechis

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera
actually sends a rather verbose explanation message when it

bounces messages

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Gilles Chehade

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Giovanni Bechis

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Giovanni Bechis

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera
(eg: if it's spam, invalid return address, blacklisted

address, etc).

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Gilles Chehade

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Giovanni Bechis

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Giovanni Bechis

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera
Here's the thread were this was pointed to me. I'm guessing

that sending an

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Gilles Chehade

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Giovanni Bechis

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Giovanni Bechis

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera
email from a non-static IP range is enough to trigger a

https://productforums.google.com/forum/#!msg/gmail/SQQAbew5tfE/-ue8aO07sf8J

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Gilles Chehade

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Giovanni Bechis

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Giovanni Bechis

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera
Can somebody confirm if these explanations are being dropped

by smtpd, if

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Gilles Chehade

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Giovanni Bechis

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Giovanni Bechis

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera
they're non-standard, or what's going on?

gmail warnings are splitted in two or more lines and smtpd

logs only one of them.

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Gilles Chehade

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Giovanni Bechis

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Giovanni Bechis
See https://github.com/OpenSMTPD/OpenSMTPD/issues/365 for

details.

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Gilles Chehade

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Giovanni Bechis

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Giovanni Bechis
Cheers
Giovanni
--
You received this mail because you are subscribed to

Looks like the devs were expecting this to make it to the list

and it did not.

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Gilles Chehade

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Giovanni Bechis

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera
Can we bring that up now? Are there any downsides to

implementing this?

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Gilles Chehade

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Giovanni Bechis

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Yes, we were waiting for the discussion to come up.
Imagine you create an account for me on your server.
I then decide to go rogue and setup a remote MX which will

reply with

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Gilles Chehade

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Giovanni Bechis

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

a HUGE response, say 1000s of lines.
a- log line can't be written until we're done reading response;
b- session needs to remember every line of the response until

done reading;

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Gilles Chehade

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Giovanni Bechis

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera
Can't we not-log all of it, but keep the message and send it to

the original

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Gilles Chehade

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Giovanni Bechis

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera
sender?
"550 Error... [25 more lines trimmed]"

I would like to have at maximum 5/6 lines of response on my log to

be able to found if a problem is recurring and which could be the original
cause.

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Gilles Chehade

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Giovanni Bechis
Cheers
Giovanni
--
You received this mail because you are subscribed to

It looks like this thread died fast, and nothing was decided.
Is there any interest on implementing this/making it configurable?
Would these errors be outputed if smtpd is run with "-v"?
Cheers,

- we read n lines, strip their newline and concat them;
- if reply was > n line, we log that output was truncated and needs to
be analyzed through smtpctl trace
Would that be ok for everyone ?
--
Gilles Chehade
https://www.poolp.org

@poolpOrg

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera
Sounds good to me.
Maybe some users will want this to be configurable (on/off).

That's not something I like to do as you probably already know ;p
--
Gilles Chehade
--

--
Pro Patria Vigilans

[Marcus MERIGHI]

Post by Gilles Chehade

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Giovanni Bechis

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Gilles Chehade

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera

Post by Giovanni Bechis

Post by Hugo Osvaldo Barrera
I recently had some messages bounce from gmail.com. I went up to their forums
to ask what's up, and on the replies, it was pointed out to my that gsmtpd
actually sends a rather verbose explanation message when it bounces messages
(eg: if it's spam, invalid return address, blacklisted address, etc).
Here's the thread were this was pointed to me. I'm guessing that sending an
https://productforums.google.com/forum/#!msg/gmail/SQQAbew5tfE/-ue8aO07sf8J
Can somebody confirm if these explanations are being dropped by smtpd, if
they're non-standard, or what's going on?

gmail warnings are splitted in two or more lines and smtpd logs only one of them.
See https://github.com/OpenSMTPD/OpenSMTPD/issues/365 for details.
Cheers
Giovanni
--

Looks like the devs were expecting this to make it to the list and it did not.
Can we bring that up now? Are there any downsides to implementing this?

Yes, we were waiting for the discussion to come up.
Imagine you create an account for me on your server.
I then decide to go rogue and setup a remote MX which will reply with
a HUGE response, say 1000s of lines.
a- log line can't be written until we're done reading response;
b- session needs to remember every line of the response until done reading;

Can't we not-log all of it, but keep the message and send it to the original
sender?
"550 Error... [25 more lines trimmed]"

I would like to have at maximum 5/6 lines of response on my log to be able to found if a problem is recurring and which could be the original cause.
Cheers
Giovanni
--

It looks like this thread died fast, and nothing was decided.
Is there any interest on implementing this/making it configurable?
Would these errors be outputed if smtpd is run with "-v"?
Cheers,

- we read n lines, strip their newline and concat them;
- if reply was > n line, we log that output was truncated and needs to
be analyzed through smtpctl trace
Would that be ok for everyone ?

Don't know, but sure OK for me; just two questions: a) no knob for this
behaviour (already answered, I guess); b) what's n going to resolve to?

Bye + Thanks, Marcus