Re: [exim] use of add_header - not an *exact* drop-in replac…

Top Page
Delete this message
Reply to this message
Author: Philip Hazel
Date:  
To: John Robinson
CC: exim-users
Subject: Re: [exim] use of add_header - not an *exact* drop-in replacement formessage?
On Fri, 6 Oct 2006, John Robinson wrote:

> Just to make sure I'm clear, in future, I'll still have e.g.
>    # Reject spam messages with score over 15, using an extra condition.
>    deny  message = This message scored $spam_score points.
>          spam = nobody:true
>          condition = ${if >{$spam_score_int}{150}{1}{0}}

>


Yes, and this would also work:

    deny  spam = nobody:true
          condition = ${if >{$spam_score_int}{150}{1}{0}}
          message = This message scored $spam_score points.


Where you *must* have "message" first is when the verb is "accept" or
"require":

    require message = I don't like you
            hosts = !10.9.8.7 


because processing stops and denial happens as soon as any condition (in
this case the "hosts" condition) is found to be false. (Note that
"accept" is equivalent to "require" with the same conditions, followed
by an unconditional "accept".)

> but instead of
>    # Add X-Spam-Flag if spam is over system-wide threshold
>    warn message = X-Spam-Flag: YES
>         spam = nobody

>
> I should instead use
>    # Add X-Spam-Flag if spam is over system-wide threshold
>    warn spam = nobody
>         add_header = X-Spam-Flag: YES

>
> Have I got this right?


Yes.

-- 
Philip Hazel            University of Cambridge Computing Service
Get the Exim 4 book:    http://www.uit.co.uk/exim-book