> - all recipients to be handled are your clients
Yes they are
> - all affected deliveries are 'local'.
None of the deliveries are local, this is just a forwarder of emails to be
modified or to be left untouched - the only purpose of this instance of exim
is to sort emails 2 ways
> - there is no significant forwarding, aliasing, or relaying 'off box'
There is
Ok, lemme try a bit differently then
0. this is not a single server setup, there are few other layers of hubs and
servers to it
1. all recipients and senders on this exim are my clients
2. some of them are registered some of them are on trial so the aim is to
differentiate the level of service
3a. the emails are being sent to recipient@??? and
they get rewritten into recipients@???
3b. this is quite irrelevant for my aim, just trying to shed some light on
the setup, recipient@??? is generated on one of the
hubs which decides whether the email is to be sent to special.domain or just
to our.domain
if you can forget the relevance of the above, aim is the following
4a. the sender for registered users is being rewritten from
sender@??? to sender@??? (Ffrsq rule so it's not
only the TO header), so when the recipient of the email replies he sends the
email to the registered-domain.com - and other boxes on the way will see the
change too
4b. the sender for trial users stays intact (or as the logic suggests it
could be sender@???)
> I suspect you can do that with a single rewrite rule, exit on lookup
> fail, and no need at all to throttle recipients to one-at-a-time.
That's exactly what I have in place right now and it's fine and works as
required. When there is a single recipient. But when there is a mixed list
of registered and trial recipients there is no way of rewriting the domain
of the sender, that's why I need to get a single recipient at a time. The
enterprise is not about confusing or fooling users but for separating them
visibly and dumb-proof-ably (not really a word, is it ;)
Using your pointers I already managed to get the correct rcpt_to and can set
a acl_m10 variable to true or false using a client list lookup and the only
thing left is to forward this value into the rewrite module so I can just
simply rewrite the sender of the email using this flag.
How?
Thanks
-----Original Message-----
From: exim-users-bounces@??? [
mailto:exim-users-bounces@exim.org] On
Behalf Of W B Hacker
Sent: Thursday, May 15, 2008 18:40
To: exim users
Subject: Re: [exim] ACL rewrite
Searcher wrote:
> I was 'hinting' because I already asked once quite specifically but there
> were no takers for the question so I figured I'd ask something easier and
go
> from there..
>
> 1. I have a list of clients
> 2. When an email arrives for a client from this list the $h_To gets
> rewritten to use a different domain
> 3. When an email arrives with multiple recipients where few are from the
> list and others are not I want to rewrite the same header only for the
> existing clients and leave it intact for others (obviously)
That is still the 'process' you think you want, not the end result you seek.
I suspect you can do that with a single rewrite rule, exit on lookup
fail, and no need at all to throttle recipients to one-at-a-time.
But I still don't see where you are trying to go with it.
==
Shall we presume that the environment is:
- all recipients to be handled are your clients
- all affected deliveries are 'local'.
- there is no significant forwarding, aliasing, or relaying 'off box'
And the goal is:
- 'some of' the final recipients are candidates for a stupidity test, so
they are to 'see' mail addressed in one way to appear to have been
addressed in some other way. Even though they could tell this was a lie
by merely setting their MUA to display full headers or clicking 'view
message source', you are certain they will never do that.
- the remaining final recipients don't even run Windows, so there is no
fun in trying to confuse them. They'll either catch you out or ignore
you, but won't make a fuss either way. No fun at all.
Note: This is a 'cosmetic' exercise, not a routing plan.
(You are aware that the 'To:' header is not what an MTA ordinarily uses
for routing decisions?)
*snip*
(gory details)
Bill
--
## List details at
http://lists.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users
## Exim details at
http://www.exim.org/
## Please use the Wiki with this list -
http://wiki.exim.org/
