From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: 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) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by lists.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EE9E69BAD8 for ; Tue, 21 Nov 2023 13:13:10 +0100 (CET) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id D3CB87F43 for ; Tue, 21 Nov 2023 13:13:10 +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 ; Tue, 21 Nov 2023 13:13:09 +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 19E7041036 for ; Tue, 21 Nov 2023 13:13:09 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <786a840a-6c99-4a6b-946c-c2413afee735@proxmox.com> Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2023 13:13:08 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Content-Language: de-AT, en-US To: Fiona Ebner , Proxmox VE development discussion References: <20231121102208.82219-1-l.wagner@proxmox.com> <6dd1ceba-07be-43a9-aef3-8ebfc020aec8@proxmox.com> From: Lukas Wagner In-Reply-To: <6dd1ceba-07be-43a9-aef3-8ebfc020aec8@proxmox.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL -0.009 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: [pve-devel] [PATCH v2 guest-common/manager 0/4] vzdump: add 'notification-mode' parameter X-BeenThere: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2023 12:13:11 -0000 On 11/21/23 11:55, Fiona Ebner wrote: > Am 21.11.23 um 11:22 schrieb Lukas Wagner: >> This patch series adds the 'notification-mode' setting for backup jobs. >> It allows users to choose between the 'old-style' notifications >> (mail to configured address, directly via a call to sendmail) or >> the 'new-style' notification system. >> >> notification-mode has three possible values: >> - legacy-sendmail: Use old system, considering mailto/mailtnotification parameters >> - notification-system: Use the new system (always sending a notification, irregardless >> of success/failure. The user is supposed to configure filtering/matching in >> notification settings) >> - auto: use old system if mailto is set, or new system if not >> >> This should provide a fix/workaround for the users' reports of >> - double notifications (these happened in case mailto was set to the same address >> as root@pam) > > Can't we detect and avoid this more easily? There would be other ways to solve this, yes. I could also deduplicate email-addresses in the backend - which isn't is as trivial as it sounds, since the 'legacy' mails are sent via separate, temporary target of type 'sendmail' - so essentially I'd need to have 'cross-target' context or something alike. > >> - notifications always being sent, even if 'mailnotification' is set to failure > > Can't we just treat 'failure' mode as always defaulting to legacy > sendmail? And properly deprecate the setting, showing a warning/info > that new notification system is not used if set to 'failure' for both > CLI and UI. And maybe not even allow setting it for new jobs/manual backups? I think an explicit switch here is much more obvious and predictable to the user. Personally I think we should wait a bit before deprecating/disallowing 'mailto' for new backup jobs. This gives us time to polish the UX of creating matchers etc. without 'forcing' the user into the new system. -- - Lukas