According to Philip Hazel:
> I've just put a new snapshot (4.390) in
>
> ftp://ftp.csx.cam.ac.uk/pub/software/email/exim/Testing/exim-snapshot.tar.gz
> ftp://ftp.csx.cam.ac.uk/pub/software/email/exim/Testing/exim-snapshot.tar.gz.sig
>
> This is the code that I'm planning to release as 4.40, probably
> immediately after the Exim course in Cambridge (the doc still needs some
> work - you only have ChangeLog and NewStuff in the snapshot). There's
> quite a lot of new code in it, so if people can test and find any
> problems, I'd be grateful.
>
> Regards,
> Philip
Nice news!
Philip, when do you plan add N266 from the wishlist ? May I help you ?
" (266) 25-May-04 S +ignore_unknown for host lists
Another alternative to +include_unknown "
And what do you think about turn it on by default?
As I wrote already:
1. Whithout this option result of verifying depends on the order of hosts in
the hostlist:
1) hostlist relay_from_hosts = non-existent-domain : 192.168.0.1
Relay from 192.168.0.1 not permitted.
2) hostlist relay_from_hosts = 192.168.0.1 : non-existent-domain
Relay from 192.168.0.1 permitted.
2.
....
> Correct. Exim assumes you have screwed up by specifying a non-existent
> host. So it takes a cautious line.
But it's wrong assumption, because it's may be a temporary dns problem,
for example a error after regular reconfiguration. In this situation
relay not permitted from all hosts until dns-administrator fixed this error in dns.
Relay from all hosts not permitted because of the problem with only the one.
Imho, it's a wrong strategy.
What about a smtp_ratelimit_hosts? In this case the rate limit is disabled for
all hosts. Is it right?
>
> --
> Philip Hazel University of Cambridge Computing Service,
> ph10@??? Cambridge, England. Phone: +44 1223 334714.
>
> --
>
> ## List details at http://www.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users Exim details at http://www.exim.org/ ##
>
>
--
-------------------------------------------------
Andrew V Stikheev Russian Institute
E-mail: sand@??? for
Phone:+7 095 192-9179 Public Networks
