Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

patch proposal

Expand Messages
  • Hari Hendaryanto
    Hello, I ve created a patch that mimicked tcp_table. however, the table lookups are directed to a unix domain socket instead of tcp servers. Actually, the
    Message 1 of 6 , Aug 1, 2011
    • 0 Attachment
      Hello,

      I've created a patch that mimicked tcp_table. however, the table lookups
      are directed to a unix domain socket instead of tcp servers.
      Actually, the patch itself is a modification of the source code of
      tcp_table.

      Map names have the form usock:/path/to/socket

      If i'm not on the right path, can i request similiar feature.? (it would
      be great to have both tcp|unix-domain-socket_table)
      tcp_table is great, its simple protocol allows us to talk to various
      applications.

      Thanks


      Powered By http://www.3g-net.net
    • Wietse Venema
      ... This really sounds like a name space design issue, since the map-specific protocol does not change. foo:tcp:host:port foo:unix:/pathname
      Message 2 of 6 , Aug 1, 2011
      • 0 Attachment
        Hari Hendaryanto:
        > Hello,
        >
        > I've created a patch that mimicked tcp_table. however, the table lookups
        > are directed to a unix domain socket instead of tcp servers.
        > Actually, the patch itself is a modification of the source code of
        > tcp_table.
        >
        > Map names have the form usock:/path/to/socket
        >
        > If i'm not on the right path, can i request similiar feature.? (it would
        > be great to have both tcp|unix-domain-socket_table)
        > tcp_table is great, its simple protocol allows us to talk to various
        > applications.
        >

        This really sounds like a name space design issue, since the
        map-specific protocol does not change.

        foo:tcp:host:port
        foo:unix:/pathname
        foo:tls:tcp:host:port

        This needs further thought.

        Wietse



        >
        >
        > Powered By http://www.3g-net.net

        [ Attachment, skipping... ]
      • Hari Hendaryanto
        ... ok, i ll wait for the good news. Powered By http://www.3g-net.net
        Message 3 of 6 , Aug 1, 2011
        • 0 Attachment
          On 8/2/2011 2:29 AM, Wietse Venema wrote:
          > Hari Hendaryanto:
          >> Hello,
          >>
          >> I've created a patch that mimicked tcp_table. however, the table lookups
          >> are directed to a unix domain socket instead of tcp servers.
          >> Actually, the patch itself is a modification of the source code of
          >> tcp_table.
          >>
          >> Map names have the form usock:/path/to/socket
          >>
          >> If i'm not on the right path, can i request similiar feature.? (it would
          >> be great to have both tcp|unix-domain-socket_table)
          >> tcp_table is great, its simple protocol allows us to talk to various
          >> applications.
          >>
          > This really sounds like a name space design issue, since the
          > map-specific protocol does not change.
          >
          > foo:tcp:host:port
          > foo:unix:/pathname
          > foo:tls:tcp:host:port
          >
          > This needs further thought.
          >
          > Wietse
          >

          ok, i'll wait for the good news.

          Powered By http://www.3g-net.net
        • Hari Hendaryanto
          ... I have another scenario tcp:host:port tcp:/path/name The reason why i wanted this feature is, by using unix domain socket i can protect my backend server
          Message 4 of 6 , Aug 3, 2011
          • 0 Attachment
            On 8/2/2011 2:29 AM, Wietse Venema wrote:
            > Hari Hendaryanto:
            >> Hello,
            >>
            >> I've created a patch that mimicked tcp_table. however, the table lookups
            >> are directed to a unix domain socket instead of tcp servers.
            >> Actually, the patch itself is a modification of the source code of
            >> tcp_table.
            >>
            >> Map names have the form usock:/path/to/socket
            >>
            >> If i'm not on the right path, can i request similiar feature.? (it would
            >> be great to have both tcp|unix-domain-socket_table)
            >> tcp_table is great, its simple protocol allows us to talk to various
            >> applications.
            >>
            > This really sounds like a name space design issue, since the
            > map-specific protocol does not change.
            >
            > foo:tcp:host:port
            > foo:unix:/pathname
            > foo:tls:tcp:host:port
            >
            > This needs further thought.
            >
            > Wietse
            >
            >
            >
            I have another scenario

            tcp:host:port
            tcp:/path/name

            The reason why i wanted this feature is, by using unix domain socket i
            can protect my backend server from interference on multiuser environment.
            while tcp server is adequate for my single administrator/user
            environment server.

            TIA


            Powered By http://www.3g-net.net
          • Wietse Venema
            Hari Hendaryanto: [ Charset ISO-8859-1 unsupported, converting... ] ... Sorry, tcp:/path/name is bad user interface design. Everywhere else in Postfix, one has
            Message 5 of 6 , Aug 3, 2011
            • 0 Attachment
              Hari Hendaryanto:
              [ Charset ISO-8859-1 unsupported, converting... ]
              > On 8/2/2011 2:29 AM, Wietse Venema wrote:
              > > Hari Hendaryanto:
              > >> Hello,
              > >>
              > >> I've created a patch that mimicked tcp_table. however, the table lookups
              > >> are directed to a unix domain socket instead of tcp servers.
              > >> Actually, the patch itself is a modification of the source code of
              > >> tcp_table.
              > >>
              > >> Map names have the form usock:/path/to/socket
              > >>
              > >> If i'm not on the right path, can i request similiar feature.? (it would
              > >> be great to have both tcp|unix-domain-socket_table)
              > >> tcp_table is great, its simple protocol allows us to talk to various
              > >> applications.
              > >>
              > > This really sounds like a name space design issue, since the
              > > map-specific protocol does not change.
              > >
              > > foo:tcp:host:port
              > > foo:unix:/pathname
              > > foo:tls:tcp:host:port
              > >
              > > This needs further thought.
              > >
              > > Wietse
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > I have another scenario
              >
              > tcp:host:port
              > tcp:/path/name

              Sorry, tcp:/path/name is bad user interface design. Everywhere else
              in Postfix, one has to specify the socket TYPE before the socket
              NAME (with BC compatibility for programs such as the SMTP client
              or TCP map that were desigined initially for TCP sockets only).

              > The reason why i wanted this feature is, by using unix domain socket i
              > can protect my backend server from interference on multiuser environment.
              > while tcp server is adequate for my single administrator/user
              > environment server.

              And I have to consider the longer-term issue of keeping the system
              usable as it evolves. This means I will fight to keep the use
              interface clean.

              Wietse
            • Hari Hendaryanto
              ... that s fine with me, on my first. patch i m using usock as dict type, since unix already used for unix user/group lookup table. but it has been said
              Message 6 of 6 , Aug 3, 2011
              • 0 Attachment
                On 8/3/2011 9:23 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
                >> I have another scenario
                >>
                >> tcp:host:port
                >> tcp:/path/name
                > Sorry, tcp:/path/name is bad user interface design. Everywhere else
                > in Postfix, one has to specify the socket TYPE before the socket
                > NAME (with BC compatibility for programs such as the SMTP client
                > or TCP map that were desigined initially for TCP sockets only).
                that's fine with me, on my first. patch i'm using "usock" as dict type,
                since "unix" already
                used for unix user/group lookup table. but it has been said that there
                was namespace
                issue with that design. well, i guest i have to look for another third
                party work arround :)

                >
                >> The reason why i wanted this feature is, by using unix domain socket i
                >> can protect my backend server from interference on multiuser environment.
                >> while tcp server is adequate for my single administrator/user
                >> environment server.
                > And I have to consider the longer-term issue of keeping the system
                > usable as it evolves. This means I will fight to keep the use
                > interface clean.
                This is very understandable to me :) . i just want to connect to unix
                domain socket with
                with a similar protocol as tcp_table. thanks a lot for attention Wietse.

                > Wietse
                >


                Powered By http://www.3g-net.net
              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.