> -----Original Message-----
> From: Christian Gregoire [mailto:cgregoir99@yahoo.com]
> Sent: Monday, August 15, 2011 2:25 PM
> To: Murray S. Kucherawy; exim-users@???
> Subject: Re : [exim] SPF checking and type 99 filtering
>
> But ... in the last end, shouldn't it be Exim's responsability to check for
> timeout ? There's already this possibility with callouts (verify =
> sender/callout=5s) or ${readsocket ...} expansion item for example. So why not
> with SPF checking ? I understand that it may be a bug in the libspf2
> implementation but again, can't Exim deal with that ?
If I understand your question correctly, there's no mechanism to tell a C function to give up after a certain period of time without having it execute in its own thread and then killing that thread if it doesn't give you back an answer in a certain period. That's a lot of complexity to add to exim, especially if it's not already multi-threaded.
A "callout" is an SMTP action either to a client or the MX of a recipient address. It's a very different thing than a C function call.
