On 2008-07-25 at 14:42 +0100, Chambers, Phil wrote: > The use of ':+:' to separate groups of addresses is described in the > spec for hosts_randomize with a route_list example. It is not clear if > the same syntax will work for route_data.
route_data just provides the routing rules that would be found by matching route_list, so what's valid syntax for a routing rule in either is valid in the other. Last paragraph of the introductory text in "20. THE MANUALROUTE ROUTER", first paragraph in "20.4 Format of the list of hosts", which isn't quite as clear as it might be since the relevant syntax is only described above, rather than as being part of the general syntax. Also, reading the source. Well, skimming. manualroute_router_entry() (the entry point for handling the router at all) first extracts from route_list or route_data before doing anything else. The route_list case does not do any mangling of the data for hosts_randomize. The local variable "randomize" is set to the copy of the router option block's hosts_randomize variable, is changed by presence of the routing options "randomize"/"no_randomize" and then passed to host_build_hostlist() as the third parameter. host.c:host_build_hostlist() then uses this generically. So, you're safe, the same syntax is used. -Phil -- ## List details at http://lists.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users ## Exim details at http://www.exim.org/ ## Please use the Wiki with this list - http://wiki.exim.org/
