1 |
On 2018-01-19, Grant Taylor <gtaylor@××××××××××××××.net> wrote: |
2 |
> On 01/19/2018 12:48 PM, Grant Edwards wrote: |
3 |
>> Yep, and it looks like the Postfix equivalent is a custom pipe transport. |
4 |
>> Once you know what phrases to google for, it's a lot easier. |
5 |
> |
6 |
> *nod* |
7 |
> |
8 |
> I figured that you would be able to find something. |
9 |
> |
10 |
> Hence why I mentioned the terms. ;-) |
11 |
|
12 |
[...] |
13 |
|
14 |
>> I wrote the server I'm using now, but it uses somebody else's snmpd |
15 |
>> module, and that's where the SSL breakage is. I've filed a bug, and I've |
16 |
>> been doing some reading toward attempting a fix, but it looks like it |
17 |
>> might be a bit hairy: it involves Python's asyncore/asynchat framework |
18 |
>> (and process pools). What's missing is handling for ssl "want read" |
19 |
>> and "want write" exceptions. |
20 |
> |
21 |
> "snmpd" or "smtpd"? |
22 |
|
23 |
Aargh. smtpd. Typos like that certinaly don't help the confusion. |
24 |
|
25 |
> You lost me at Python. (I know it's a personal prejudice. But I |
26 |
> think I'm allowed to have it as long as I acknowledge them as such.) |
27 |
|
28 |
I'm going to try stunnel in front of the existing solution first. |
29 |
|
30 |
If that doesn't work, I'll try sendmail/postfix/exim. It looks like |
31 |
they'll all do what I want (modulo the no-queue desire). FWIW, the |
32 |
google phrase for exim is "exim pipe transport": |
33 |
|
34 |
https://www.exim.org/exim-html-current/doc/html/spec_html/ch-the_pipe_transport.html |
35 |
|
36 |
Thanks again (and apologies) to everbody who tried to figure out what |
37 |
it was I was asking... |
38 |
|
39 |
-- |
40 |
Grant Edwards grant.b.edwards Yow! They collapsed |
41 |
at ... like nuns in the |
42 |
gmail.com street ... they had no |
43 |
teen appeal! |