On 8/24/2010 7:41 AM, Charles Marcus wrote:
On 2010-08-22 8:38 PM, Stan Hoeppner<s...@hardwarefreak.com> wrote:
Stan Hoeppner put forth on 8/22/2010 7:34 PM:
So if we reverse the scenario and put the "REJECT" first, it's a final
decision? If so, and if I've described the situation correctly, why do
we have this opposite behavior between whitelisting and blacklisting?
If I've not described this correctly, what am I missing?
Noel's post answered my question, so ignore my previous message.
"OK" != accept_it_right_now
I guess I need some clarification now...
My understanding is this is not true if you have all checks under
recipient_restrictions (and delay_reject enabled) - an OK in this case
*would* cause the message to be accepted immediately, while a DUNNO
would skip to the next check.
No, behavior is still as I described. smtpd_delay_reject
doesn't change the order.
But in any case, PERMIT/REJECT always happens immediately.
Is this correct?
REJECT happens immediately, DUNNO skips to the next
restriction, OK/PERMIT skips to the next smtpd_mumble_section.
Mail must pass *each* smtpd_*_section before it's accepted.
-- Noel Jones
