Re: [Exim] :fail: from a router

> I have tried both with and without the space after the final :. What I am
> seeing is that when this fails in the ACL, the cannot_route_message I define
> in the router is not being passed back to the ACL. It only uses the
> message= value provided in the ACL. Likely what I want to do just can't be
> done the way I am trying to do it.

If you have message = then that will be returned regardless of what you put
after the :fail: .

However:
$acl_verify_message: During the expansion of the "message" modifier in an ACL
statement after an address verification has failed, this variable contains
the original failure message that will be overridden by the expanded string.

May do what you want.

> Does anyone know if a variable is set with the router that caused the ACL to
> fail? If so, I could use that variable value to query an error message for
> the ACL from a file or MySQL.

see above.

> What about the system filter - when is it evaluated and is it considered
> when the ACL runs through the routers to determine deliverability? This
> could solve my blacklist problem but could create problems for the
> whitelists.

I'm not sure, I don't have many dealings with filters.

> In the end, it looks like my only solution to this might be to make the
> error in the ACL be very generic or list all the possible reasons the
> message was rejected.

Could be =)

> > I don't think so. transports only take a message and transport it to it's
> > destination (be it a local file, remote smtp, pipe, etc). The contionals
> > are on routers. The routers attempt to figure out how a message needs to
> be
> > transported. I used a router to update an sql database that contains an
> > automatic whitelist. (Basically local users who email non-local users
> will
> > whitelist the non-local user. I know there's a thing about senders, but
> > the suits don't seem to understand) I did this in a router because I
> wanted
> > mail I sent (via /usr/lib/sendmail) to be whitelisted as well.
>
> That's a great idea! I might have to think about doing that as well.

I thought it was a bad idea because of forged senders. I did it so I
wouldn't have to put up with people getting blocked. I still think it's a
bad idea.

--
Lab tests show that use of micro$oft causes cancer in lab animals