Re: [Exim] RBL feature request

At 14:53 -0400 7/30/2001, Tabor J. Wells wrote:
>Return codes are:
>
>127.1.0.1 RBL
>127.1.0.2 DUL
>127.1.0.3 DUL and RBL
>127.1.0.4 RSS
>127.1.0.5 RSS and RBL
>127.1.0.6 RSS and DUL
>127.1.0.7 RSS and DUL and RBL

Hmmm...to match what we're doing now, I need RBL or DUL for blocking and
RSS for warning.

In other words, rather than the existing way: giving the desired return
code in the rbl_domains value, it would be cleaner to get back a variable
with the returned address, or have a bit-masking syntax.

If Exim will do a single lookup and cache the result (per message), then
something long like

rbl_domains = XX=127.1.0.1/block:XX=127.1.0.2/block:XX=127.1.0.3/block:\
XX=127.1.0.5/block:XX=127.1.0.6/block:XX=127.1.0.7/block:XX= 127.1.0.4/warn

might do. (XX is the magic for RBL+ which is on my other machine)

If it isn't cached, then 3 remote lookups just became 7 local ones...better
than before, but not ideal. All this assumes that the mail-abuse folks
manage to take our money and give us access via zone transfer.

Since the above list from Tabor clearly shows a bit map, a syntax for
masking the bits would be nice, but I think both a variable with the lookup
result and a masking syntax for the rbl_domains setting would give the best
flexibility.

Philip, I think we (Exim community) could live with the above through the
3.3x timeframe, without a change to Exim. Or we (this ISP) could change
our use of RBL. So Exim 4 should be "soon enough".

--John