> The access(5) manpage is for the Postfix SMTP DAEMON. It says so
> on the first line of the manpage, and it says so again in the first
> paragraph.
>
> The postscreen_access_list parameter, as the name suggests, is for
> the POSTSCREEN DAEMON. This name is as explicit as it can be, without
> changing the name to this_is_not_smtpd_this_is_postscreen_access_list.
Ah. O.K. My original post said that I'm trying to configure
postscreen_access.cidr, but also want to understand things more generally.
I didn't see any differentiation between the two parts in your answer. In
fact, "... an access table expects results as described in the access(5)
manpage ..." led me in the opposite direction, thinking that, since
postscreen_access.cider is "an access table", then access(5) must apply.
Now I understand. Thanks.
>
> Here is a summary of the definition in the postconf(5) manpage:
>
> postscreen_access_list (default: permit_mynetworks)
> Permanent white/blacklist for remote SMTP client IP
> addresses.
> postscreen(8) searches this list immediately after a remote SMTP
> client
> ...
>
> permit_mynetworks
> ...
>
> type:table
> ...
>
> permit
> ...
>
> reject
> ...
Yes. If it helps, my confusion started here. The above paragraph lists
permit, reject and dunno. But doesn't say they are the only values. It
also says to use a CIDR table. And the CIDR table page shows an example
using "OK". It does not say that "OK" doesn't work for postscreen. Hence,
my original question about "OK" vs. "permit". Now I understand. Thanks.
What about case? The other result values in various table examples
(including the CIDR table example) are in caps ("OK", "REJECT",...). But
postconf(5) shows the values of postscreen_access_list to be in lower case.
Should permit/reject/dunno be strictly lowercase in the
postscreen_access.cider table, or does upper case also work?
Thanks,
Michael
