--On Monday, March 22, 2004 13:22:52 -0600 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 23 Mar 2004, Craig Ringer wrote:
On Tue, 2004-03-23 at 02:28, Rob Siemborski wrote:
> It also opens a world of possibility for new bugs. There definately isn't
> a consensus on what the desireable behavior here is.
User-created sieve loops strike me as one "fun" possibility to be
avoided at all costs.
Maybe a too simplistic notion on my part, but could the deliverydb be
used to prevent that somehow? Though, I guess that would entail
chaning the key to reflect the target folder, maybe? (Currently only
the Message-Id is used, right?)
If each 'delivery' adds a Received header; then a simple limit on
the number of Received headers would do the trick.
And if it's all handled by a single process that iterates for
delivery step; then it could simply keep and check a list of
which scripts (or mailboxes) it's already visited.
The real bikeshed question is what it should do when a loop is
detected? And should that action be at all user configurable?
-Pat
---
Home Page: http://asg.web.cmu.edu/cyrus
Wiki/FAQ: http://cyruswiki.andrew.cmu.edu
List Archives/Info: http://asg.web.cmu.edu/cyrus/mailing-list.html
