On Wed, 19 Apr 2006, John Rowe wrote:
> The question is, can we handle a partial machine failure in a way that
> is on balance better than what happens at the moment, given that 99.99%
> of the time the machine isn't broken. Hence my suggestion of a
> conservative test and a cautious response. It's a case of working out
> the circumstances in which exim can return a hard error, asking "can we
> be pretty sure this is a machine problem?" and if so converting it to a
> soft error and logging the incident (to detect false positives).
It occurs to me that
errno = 0
call tcpwrappers
if result is "reject" then
if errno = 0 or errno = ENOENT then reject 5xx
else reject 4xx
fi
is simple, and probably "does the right thing mostly".
Philip
--
Philip Hazel, University of Cambridge Computing Service.
--
## List details at http://www.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users
## Exim details at http://www.exim.org/
## Please use the Wiki with this list - http://www.exim.org/eximwiki/
