On 26/03/07, Cronfy <cronfy@???> wrote:
> Hello.
>
> > That's intended behaviour. Your log would have alerted you to this.
> > Hostlists like this are compared as IP addresses, and if your list
> > cannot be completely resolved to a list of IP addresses, the
> > comparison will fail.
>
> Whew.. Thanks for making this clear. The documentation is very unclear
> about this. I reread it several times, but I had been thinking it applies
> to a host that is compared against a host list (or at least to a single item
> in a host list). I was unsure until I read your explaination.
>
> In example:
>
> ===================================
> If any item that follows +ignore_unknown requires information that cannot
> be found, Exim ignores that item and proceeds to the rest of the list.
> For example:
>
> accept hosts = +ignore_unknown : friend.example : \
> 192.168.4.5
>
> accepts from any host whose name is friend.example and from 192.168.4.5,
> whether or not its host name can be found. Without +ignore_unknown,
> if no name can be found for 192.168.4.5, it is rejected.
> ====================================
>
> According to this, "Without +ignore_unknown, if no name can be found
> for 192.168.4.5, it is rejected". But according to what you say (and
> what I see in preactice), "without +ignore_unknown, if no name can be
> found for 192.168.4.5, whole list is discarded and any host does
> not match the list".
The 'it' in the sentence you quoted from the docs refers to the
message for which the ACL fragment in the example was checking. Your
description is correct in the general case, and the effect in the
particular case of an 'accept' ACL is correctly described in the docs.
Peter
--
Peter Bowyer
Email: peter@???
