Re: [Exim] Changing the order of routers

On Wednesday 22 October 2003 03:04, Dennis Skinner wrote:
> On Tue, 2003-10-21 at 18:02, Alan Chandler wrote:
> > localuser:
> > driver = accept
> > local_parts = CONFDIR/local-users
> > retry_use_local_part
> > transport = local_delivery
> > user = ${lc:$local_part}
> >
> > allelse:
> > FAIL ALL MESSAGES THAT GET THIS FAR SO THE forceoutside_part2 IS NEVER
> > TRAVERSED
>
> Try no_more or more=no at the end of the localuser router....I think
> that is what you are asking for...

I tried this, it didn't work - I think because the preconditions for localuser
were not met. I found the documentation on this (what is and what isn't a
precondition) a bit thin and ambiguous, which is why I asked the list about
this problem in the first place.

However, I figured a way around the problem now - but putting the same
precondition on forceoutside_part2 (ie local_parts = CONFDIR/local-users) as
localuser, then any address rejected by localuser is also rejected by
forceoutside_part2 - and so the problem of forceoutside_part2 picking up
rejected addresses goes away



>
> I've been at work too long tonight, so take this with a grain of salt
> (my brain is bit fried)...but i think if you put "verify=no" in the
> fourceoutside router, then the acl that checks the recipient won't use
> that to see if the recipient is valid. If the recipient is not valid,
> then the msg won't be get to the routing stage (unless you bypass that
> in the acl).

Not sure I understand what you mean here. Do I have a relay whole?

>
> If you run exim in debug mode, you will prob notice that the routers get
> run twice. Once during recipient verification and again during routing.
>
> Hope that helps....

--
Alan Chandler
alan@???