No, all I was saying was that address literals were not currently
processed in the manner you expected. Wietse's patch implements
the (inadvertently) missing feature.
Oh, excellent! That's a easy-to-understand statement.
Thank you.
- James
> On Feb 5, 2017, at 4:44 PM, James wrote:
>
> The original source of my confusion was assuming that all information
> received with the HELO or EHLO command would be processed by the
> smtpd_helo_restrictions.
>
> I understand now that that the text under
> http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5
Thank you for the replies.
The original source of my confusion was assuming that all information received
with the HELO or EHLO command would be processed by the smtpd_helo_restrictions.
I understand now that that the text under
http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#smtpd_helo_restrictions in
Viktor Dukhovni:
>
> > On Feb 5, 2017, at 1:25 PM, James wrote:
> >
> > I guess my basic question here is "does check_helo_access, or
> > check_helo_a_access, play nicely with cidr:table's when the helo/ehlo
> > command presents an address literal?"
>
> Support for cidr tables in check_helo_a
