[Mimedefang] sendmail 8.13.0

[Matthew Schumacher]

David F. Skoll wrote:
> Actually, it's far more than that.  You can implement *any* Sendmail map
> with a daemon, including mailertable, access_db, virtusertable, ...

That is cool!!!

> MIMEDefang will allow you to define a function called filter_map
> that will be called with two arguments:  A map name, and a key.  It can
> then do whatever magic it likes to "look up" the key.
> 
> Here's an example I'm working on right now.
> 
> Sendmail config file:
> 
> 	V10/Berkeley
> 	Kmysock socket unix:/var/spool/MIMEDefang/map.sock
> 
> The MIMEDefang filter:
> 
> 	sub filter_map ($$) {
> 	    my($mapname, $key) = @_;
> 	    my $ans;
> 	    $ans = reverse($key) . " - " . reverse($mapname);
> 	    return ("OK", $ans);
> 	}
> 
> Results of a sendmail -bt test session:
> 
> 	$ /usr/sbin/sendmail -bt -C ./map.cf
> 	No local mailer defined
> 	ADDRESS TEST MODE (ruleset 3 NOT automatically invoked)
> 	Enter <ruleset> <address>
> 	> /map mysock Testing 1 2 3
> 	map_lookup: mysock (Testing 1 2 3) returns 3 2 1 gnitseT - kcosym (0)
> 
> Isn't that so cool? :-)  I defy anyone to write rules with Sendmail's .cf
> language that can reverse a string.
> 
> Of course, a non-toy example would do something real, like looking things
> up in an LDAP directory or a SQL database.
> 

I already have sendmail rules to check valid email addresses against a 
supported map backend (LDAP) so this basically a different way to do the 
same thing but would be a bit more flexible.  I wonder if their are any 
performance differences between having mimedefang doing the ldap lookup 
instead of sendmail.  Have you noticed any performance differences in 
your initial testing?

schu