http://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=5259
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Severity|minor |blocker
Status|RESOLVED |REOPENED
Resolution|FIXED |
------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-01-03 09:54 -------
I thought that we agreed that this wasn't a good idea and that
"clear_trusted_networks" really meant "clear trusted networks".
I'd *much* rather just document (in M::SA::Conf) that if you're configuring
trusted networks, etc, that you should probably include 127/8 in your config.
Additionally, adding an example trusted/internal networks config to local.cf,
commented out, would be good too.
In any case, I'm -1 on the current changes to trunk as it accepts invalid
configs like (10.1.1.1 will be trusted, and the user is no longer warned about
it):
trusted_networks 10/8 !10.1.1.1
Also, it is inconsistent in whether it requires you to include 127/8 in your
config... consider the case where 1.2.3.4 is your MSA that you want to be
trusted, but not internal (and SA is running on the next relay, localhost).
This works:
trusted_networks 1.2.3.4
internal_networks 127.0.0.1
This doesn't (but should if we're saying that 127/8 is included for you):
trusted_networks 1.2.3.4
Also... less severe, but annoying nonetheless, this duplicate config is accepted
now:
trusted_networks 10/8 10/9 10/10 10/8
There have been a *lot* fewer cases of confusion about configuring
trusted/internal networks on the users@ list since the strict config linting of
trusted/internal networks was introduced. Can we please just leave out the
defaults and document a recommended/proper config?
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.
