> On 16/05/2024 22:32, Ian Z via Exim-users wrote:
> > But my question is about verification, and in
> > particular about the situation where a RCPT stage ACL will have verify
> > = recipient. The filter can't be evaluated at that stage.
>
> Verification consists of running the routing process; the same router
> chain as is used for delivery (apart from anything you specifically
> set up to be different by using the verify_{only,recipient,sender}
> option(s) on specific routers). I'm not sure why you think a filter
> cannot be evaluated.
The corollary and implication of this is that if you have routers that
will only work properly once the message is fully received (because they
require headers or ACL variables only set then), you need to mark them
as no_verify, and possibly write verify_only versions that do address
validation of some sort but no actual router processing.
There is also no universal answer to whether a .forward that only has
bad addresses should cause a RCPT TO to that person to fail, or whether
you should accept the address and bounce later. Depending on your tastes
on this, you might want your actual .forward handling router to be
no_verify and to have a stub verify_only router that says 'yes' for all
valid people with .forwards without changing that their .forward works.
(My personal view is 'reject early if you can', but tastes differ and
.forward bounces might not go to the original sender anyway but to
somewhere else and so on.)
- cks
--
## subscription configuration (requires account):
##
https://lists.exim.org/mailman3/postorius/lists/exim-users.lists.exim.org/
## unsubscribe (doesn't require an account):
## exim-users-unsubscribe@???
## Exim details at
http://www.exim.org/
## Please use the Wiki with this list -
http://wiki.exim.org/
