At 13:51 +0100 2003/03/24, Nico Erfurth wrote:
>Giuliano Gavazzi wrote:
>
>>I do not understand. Do you mean that it no longer accepts authentication
>>requests unless auth_advertise_hosts is set (and the client is in the
>>list)? Or do you mean that if it is set it will not accept authentication
>>request from clients not in the list?
>>I run 4.12, have no auth_advertise_hosts at all and exim accept
>>authentication requests, so I think the second statement is right.
>
>From exim 4.11 Changelog
>
>46. An Exim server now accepts AUTH or STARTTLS commands only if their
> availability has been advertised in response to EHLO.
>
>in exim 4.14 this was refined with server_avertise_condition to only
>advertise a authenticator if the condition evalutes to true.
>
very nice. My puzzlement was justified though, as Phil sentence was
in reply to a slightly ambiguous sentence:
On Mon, 24 Mar 2003, Philip Hazel wrote:
> On Sun, 23 Mar 2003, Tim Jackson wrote:
>
> > Hi Giuliano, on Sun, 23 Mar 2003 22:00:05 +0000 (GMT) you wrote:
> >
> > > > auth_advertise_hosts = *
> > > what's this? I haven't got it in my conf.
> >
> > Sets which hosts Exim advertises SMTP AUTH to in the EHLO response. Exim
> > will accept authentication requests without it, however,
>
> No longer. Changed at release 4.11.
>
Tim really just meant to say that auth_advertise_hosts is not
required and exim will accept auth req. without it
[auth_advertise_hosts].
Well, this is my daily dose of sentence disemboweling. [is it?]
Giuliano
