> -----Original Message----- > From: Christian Gregoire [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Monday, August 15, 2011 2:25 PM > To: Murray S. Kucherawy; [email protected] > Subject: Re : [exim] SPF checking and type 99 filtering > > But ... in the last end, shouldn't it be Exim's responsability to check for > timeout ? There's already this possibility with callouts (verify = > sender/callout=5s) or ${readsocket ...} expansion item for example. So why not > with SPF checking ? I understand that it may be a bug in the libspf2 > implementation but again, can't Exim deal with that ?
If I understand your question correctly, there's no mechanism to tell a C function to give up after a certain period of time without having it execute in its own thread and then killing that thread if it doesn't give you back an answer in a certain period. That's a lot of complexity to add to exim, especially if it's not already multi-threaded. A "callout" is an SMTP action either to a client or the MX of a recipient address. It's a very different thing than a C function call. -- ## List details at https://lists.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users ## Exim details at http://www.exim.org/ ## Please use the Wiki with this list - http://wiki.exim.org/
