In message <3qp73y409zzh...@spike.porcupine.org>, you wrote:
>Ronald F. Guilmette:
>>
>> In the access(5) man page, it is either explicitly stated or else
>> easily inferred what XXX response value will be sent back to the
>> SMTP client for each of the possible values listed in the ACCEPT
>> ACTIONS and REJECT ACTIONS sections.
>>
>> What XXX response values will be sent back to the SMTP client for
>> each of the various possible lookup result values listed in the
>> OTHER ACTIONS section?
>
>Each access map lookup returns
>
>One line starting with REJECT and containing no OTHER ACTIONS
>
>Or
>
>One line starting with PREPEND and containing no OTHER ACTIONS
>
>...
>
>Or
>
>One line not starting with REJECT or PREPEND etc. containing
>OTHER ACTIONS (note plural) such as permit_mynetworks,
>reject_unknown_sender_domain and so on.
Thank you Wietse. Unfortunately, for me at least, what you just said
still leaves me with many questions.
If I have understood you correctly, you have said that for every kind/type
of ACTION specification listed in access(5) _other_ than REJECT & PREPEND
it is possible to combine that ACTION specification (and its asssociated
parameters?) with additional ACTION specifications.
In the case of UCE restriction names... like permit_mynetworks,
reject_unknown_sender_domain and so on... I know what such combinations
look like, syntatically. It's a simple list, optionally comma separated,
like:
permit_mynetworks, reject_unknown_sender_domain
I know what this looks like because my main.cf is replete with exactly such
lists.
What I am unclear about is what the syntax would look like if I wanted to
combine, say, a WARN clase with something else. What would that look like?
Like this?
permit_mynetworks, WARN This mail is goofy!
Whatever the allowed (required?) syntax may be for such combinations, I'd
also very much like to know if such combinations may be employed also as
results returned from policy daemons.
Thanks in advance for any further clarification.
