On Sat, 14 Mar 2009, Michael Tokarev wrote:
Henk van Oers wrote:
On Sat, 14 Mar 2009, Michael Tokarev wrote:
Henk van Oers wrote:
[]
I was trying to use action OK to jump out of header checks.
That is: not only skip the next patterns, but also the next
input lines.
[]
Isn't it better to use the same semantics as in restrictions?
(Wasn't that what people ment when they used OK?)
See above for recipient example -- in case there are multiple
recipients of email.
Mmm, i do not see what you mean.
All rules applies to one recipient independently of other
recipients. If your rules returns REJECT for one recipient,
this one particular recipient will be rejected. If it's DUNNO
or OK or whatever instead, it, again, applies to this very
recipient only. All other recipients, if any, will be evaluated
independently, with their own REJECT/OK/DUNNO.
That is how i understand it, and the difference between OK and DUNNO
is: OK= accept now, DUNNO= move to the next test in the list of
restrictions.
The same is with header_checks, where each header line acts as
individual recipient for smtpd_recipient_restrictions. You can't
control how other header lines will be evaluated based on one
particular line.
Aha, that is where i got confused. I was seeing the list of
patterns as a list of restrictions.
I should use a list of regexp tables and than there will
be the same distinction between OK and DUNNO. Right?
