On Fri, May 17, 2024 at 10:39:19AM GMT, Chris Siebenmann via Exim-users wrote:
Again sorry to persist in my obtuseness, but ...
> > > 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.
But what do you mean by "properly"? How does a router do verification
"improperly"? What will in fact happen in the situation I staged in
the first paragraph above, which in my estimation is not at all
unusual (it may even be in the example config, I haven't checked; of
course the added wrinkle is the .forward filter file, but that too
isn't too exotic, I hope).
And regardless of the answer to the above, if I do add no_verify to
the redirect router in question, Lena's solution to the problem of
getting the forwarding address into an ACL ceases to be available.
Correct?
--
Ian
--
## 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/
