re: [exim] Re: ACL message question

Etusivu
Poista viesti
Vastaa
Lähettäjä: Kelley Reynolds
Päiväys:  
Vastaanottaja: Lists - Exim
Aihe: re: [exim] Re: ACL message question
> > It appears that not all ACLs support the 'message' option. In the RCPT ACL, for example, having a deny ACL that uses
> >
> > deny
> >     message = "This will appear in the logs and 550"
> >     condition = 1

> >
> > will properly support having a message, but when a deny ACL uses
> >
> > deny
> >     message = "This will not appear in the logs and 550"
> >     !verify = reverse_host_lookup

> >
> > then it uses something which appears to be non-modifiable... and example:
> >
> > 2004-11-04 11:31:44 H=(69.9.164.137) [220.169.151.224] F=<ietnwq89bmxfz@???> rejected RCPT <mayor@???>: host lookup failedfor reverse lookup check (failed to find host name from IP address)
>
> <SNIP>
>
>
> IIRC you use 'log_message' to get a specific error message in the log file.
> The 'message' line you have above will still show up in the 550 error though.
> Try it out using telnet and you should see what you expect. So:
>
> deny
>     message This shows up in 550
>     log_message This shows up in log
>     !verify = reverse_host_lookup

>
> You will still get the 'rejected RCPT' line in the log too. At least this is
> how I do it b/ I prefer a different message in the logs as opposed to the 550
> message.


I knew that I could use log_message to display something specifically in the logs, but I wanted to be sure that what the connecting MTA saw was what it was supposed to be. I guess then that the problem is that 'message' behavior is erratic when it comes to different conditions. For some denials, it'll output the 'message' line, for others (like reverse_host_lookup), it won't, though that's hardly self-evident. Perhaps having the behavior consistent (one way or another) might not be a bad idea? If that was the case, I would never have asked the question.

Kelley Reynolds