From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: <d.csapak@proxmox.com> Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 48FB594257 for <pmg-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Wed, 21 Feb 2024 15:35:39 +0100 (CET) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 2A4BD19F09 for <pmg-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Wed, 21 Feb 2024 15:35:09 +0100 (CET) Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (proxmox-new.maurer-it.com [94.136.29.106]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS for <pmg-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Wed, 21 Feb 2024 15:35:08 +0100 (CET) Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id C53094451A; Wed, 21 Feb 2024 15:35:07 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <3b72662a-993e-4348-b60b-a41e1bf79e8e@proxmox.com> Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2024 15:35:07 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Beta Content-Language: en-US To: Stoiko Ivanov <s.ivanov@proxmox.com>, pmg-devel@lists.proxmox.com References: <20240112192151.40998-1-s.ivanov@proxmox.com> From: Dominik Csapak <d.csapak@proxmox.com> In-Reply-To: <20240112192151.40998-1-s.ivanov@proxmox.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.019 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% DMARC_MISSING 0.1 Missing DMARC policy KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE -0.01 - Subject: Re: [pmg-devel] [PATCH pmg-api/pmg-docs v2] make filter timeout configurable X-BeenThere: pmg-devel@lists.proxmox.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox Mail Gateway development discussion <pmg-devel.lists.proxmox.com> List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/options/pmg-devel>, <mailto:pmg-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://lists.proxmox.com/pipermail/pmg-devel/> List-Post: <mailto:pmg-devel@lists.proxmox.com> List-Help: <mailto:pmg-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pmg-devel>, <mailto:pmg-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=subscribe> X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2024 14:35:39 -0000 Looked and tested this, and it does what it says on the tin. My original concern still exists but that would require a much more intrusive fix (that we can still do in the future): when the sending/remaining processing of the mail (aka the actions) take longer than what time we still have remaining, we have the same behavior as the original problem. a short example: filter-timeout: x seconds processing up to the check: y seconds (but smaller than x) if now the actions take more than 'x - y' seconds, the first postfix instance runs into it's timeout, but the pmg-smtp-filter is already processing the action (e.g. sending/quarantining) To completely fix that, we'd have to (before the timeout check): find out what actions would be taken, return the postfix that status as if it was done (e.g. accept/reject) (if that's even possible?) and then do the actual action. if that fails, we'd have to take an appropriate action, e.g. send an ndr. Aside from that, consider this series Reviewed-by: Dominik Csapak <d.csapak@proxmox.com> Tested-by: Dominik Csapak <d.csapak@proxmox.com>