Re: [exim] Sanity Check: 5 short router questions

Ron White wrote:
> On Fri, 2010-05-14 at 15:24 +0100, Ian Eiloart wrote:
>> --On 14 May 2010 14:57:59 +0100 Ron White <exim.ml@???> wrote:
>>
>>> A couple of child like questions for my own sanity here;
>>>
>>> 1. Am I right in thinking you can have multiple condition = statements
>>> in a router? (I know you can do 'and' but I have three conditions to
>>> check in a router)
>> I think so. I'm not sure, but I don't see any reason why not.
>
>
> Just confirming you *can't* do that by the look of it:
>
> 2010-05-14 16:02:26 [5074] Exim configuration error in line 545
> of /etc/exim/exim.conf:
> "condition" option set for the second time
>
> So it's a no. Damn and blast..... back to the drawing board.
>
>

Ron,

That is not as 'limiting' as it might seem at first glance.

Think, for example, of the entire router 'chain' as equivalent in some ways to a
single ACL clause with multiple conditions *within* it.

So - while some conditionals may or may not still need to be complex
individually, the path to fine-grained control is to have many routers, each
with ONE bespoke conditional. And now and then an 'unseen' or several (I've had
as many as seven such steps).

At the end of the day, exactly the same level of control can be acheived, just
with a good deal more partially-duplicated text.

And - gieven logging options - it may be easier to debug.


CAVEAT1: Some of us are lazy and simply push most of the complexity off to an
SQL call, which also gets around the read-only nature of an acl_m once DATA
phase has been exited.

CAVEAT2: SQL infrastructure does not come cheap, even if you are using it on the
box for other needs anyway.

Bill