On Wed, 21 Jul 2004, Ron wrote:
> Exactly, which is why I came to believe we probably need both a size clamp
> and a maximum time window for DATA to complete within.
Noted.
> > message_size_limit applies to all messages handled by Exim. It has no
> > inbuilt concept of incoming and outgoing.
>
> Ok. In 14.23 it mostly talks about incoming messages, though it was clear
> that as a transport option it applies to outgoing messages.
Oh sorry. Apologies.
You and I are using "incoming" and "outgoing" differently. I was
thinking you meant "outgoing from my site" and "incoming to my site"
(which is a common usage). It seems you really meant "incoming to this
host" and "outgoing from this host". Yes, 14.23 is concerned with
incoming to this host.
The *global* message_size_limit does indeed apply to all messages that
Exim receives, from whatever source.
The *transport* option message_size_limit further limits the size of
messages that can be handled by that particular transport. It makes
sense only if it is smaller than the global limit.
> Some carefully placed new timeout limits and something like the acl
> described above for oversize messages would probably about cover what
> I see we could reasonably do here. Someone may suggest a better way
> to implement the same result though.
Timeout, maybe. I don't think the effort of an ACL is worth it. (There
is nothing it could do other than "drop".)
--
Philip Hazel University of Cambridge Computing Service,
ph10@??? Cambridge, England. Phone: +44 1223 334714.
Get the Exim 4 book: http://www.uit.co.uk/exim-book
