Hi!
I'd absolutely support this!
It would make ugly things like this much nicer:
receiver_verify
receiver_verify_except_nets = "/usr/local/lib/exim/customer-net"
Now:
195.222.224.0/19
195.222.192.0/20
195.222.216.0/21
195.222.208.0/22
195.222.212.0/23
195.222.214.0/24
195.222.215.0/25
195.222.215.128/26
Better:
195.222.192.0/18
!195.222.215.192/26
(The upper (real) configuration awfully looks like a training
example on netmasks for students).
However, there could be two strategies for implementing such
a negation:
- The networks are evaluated top down
- The networks are ordered by netmask and evaluated based on
their netmask.
E.g., should
sender_host_accept_relay = "!0.0.0.0/0:195.222.192/18"
and
sender_host_accept_relay = "195.222.192/18:!0.0.0.0/0"
result into the same behaviour?
Greetings,
Georg
--
*** Exim information can be found at
http://www.exim.org/ ***
