On Fri, Mar 19, 2021 at 12:20:10AM -0400, Bill Cole wrote:
> > * If so, does this apply to **(a)** the entire set of restrictions;
> > **(b)** just the restriction list where cfg’d; **(c)** only the
> > restriction that immediately follows **warn_if_reject**?
>
> As I read the postconf(5) man page and SMTPD_ACCESS_README, it is a
> prefix for a single restriction directive: "c"
The documentation reads:
warn_if_reject
A safety net for testing. When "warn_if_reject" is placed before a
--------
reject-type restriction, access table query, or check_policy_service
-----------------------
query, this logs a "reject_warning" message instead of rejecting a
request (when a reject-type restriction fails due to a temporary
error, this logs a "reject_warning" message for any implicit
"defer_if_permit" actions that would normally prevent mail from
being accepted by some later access restriction). This feature has
no effect on defer_if_reject restrictions.
The use of singular throughout is pretty clear.
> HOWEVER, "b" would not be a totally unreasonable implementation or
> reading of the docs, so I could be wrong.
That would make the docs exceedingly poorly written.
--
Viktor.
