On Wed, May 08, 2002 at 02:54:42PM -0400, Tabor J. Wells wrote:
> I suppose that arguably this is a "bug" in convert4r4 to not generate
> multiple warn statements in this case to not change existing behavior but I
> guess it doesn't matter much either way.
You can argue that, but the ACLs in exim 4 are so different from what you
had in exim 3, that convert4r4 can only do so much.
For that matter, there are things you could do with exim 3 that are non
trivial or not yet possible with exim 4 ACL-wise (of course overall exim 4
ACLs are much nicer and featureful, but they are lacking things exim 3 could
do)
Example of non trivial: not do callbacks on a header domain
Examples of Not possible:
2002-05-08 14:13:10 175Yk8-0000TC-00 rejected from (211.34.143.253) [211.34.143.253] <jenifer@???>: syntax error in 'To' header: missing or malformed local part (expected word or "<"): failing address is: Undisclosed Recipients
or this (which I coded in exim 3)
2002-04-29 00:06:35 1725Dd-0000Tx-00 rejected from ecpport2.ecopost.com.au (smtp1.midcoast.com.au) [203.28.64.15]: can't currently verify any sender in the header lines (envelope sender is <>). Are you sure your domain in From: and/or Reply-To: resolves from the internet (host -t MX domain) and can be connected back to for delivery of replies? - Failure is temporary, you can try again later
Unfortunately, any header verify fail only returns the value of
"message". Even the cool new SMTP callback code that tells you what your
mail server said and why it failed callbacks doesn't give you any info when
it's done inside header checks.
This is basically the reason why I can't upgrade my real servers to exim 4
I've already told Philip about this, and I've said I may code a patch, but
I've had too many other priorities right now (especially for a real patch
that Philip could take)
Marc
--
Microsoft is to operating systems & security ....
.... what McDonalds is to gourmet cooking
Home page:
http://marc.merlins.org/ | Finger marc_f@??? for PGP key
