Re: [exim] ACL message question

Pàgina inicial
Delete this message
Reply to this message
Autor: Kelley Reynolds
Data:  
A: Lists - Exim
Assumpte: Re: [exim] ACL message question
> >> ACLs are processed in sequential order. Some ACL condition clauses
> >> overwrite the "message" field that's used when the ACL triggers a
> >> rejection, and some don't. This is why your results are
> >> inconsistent; to get consistency, put your clauses in the
> >> logically correct order.
>
> Actually that explanation was too simplistic. There are in fact
> _two_ "message" fields (the one used by message=, which is returned
> to the client, and the one used by log_message=, which is logged
> and defaults to the message= value if not explicitly set). Many of
> the ACL clauses set the log_message= field without touching the
> message= field, so in those cases what you see in the log doesn't
> match what the client sees (which you'll probably have to use exim -bh
> to find out).


Okay, so this explains why switching the order still didn't work... sometimes log_message is set and sometimes it isn't, but log_message is always what is shown even if not explicitly set. I didn't see that anywhere in the docs, but that doesn't mean I'm not just blind.

> verify = reverse_host_lookup doesn't verify an "address" in that
> context, the docs are referring to an email address not an IP.
> reverse_host_lookup actually only sets the log_message= field as
> far as I can tell from the code.


I just assumed that when the docs were written, only address verification was there and that the other bits were added later but worked in the same fashion.

Kelley Reynolds
President
Inside Systems, Inc