> put the ip addresses in ignore_target_hosts instead.
Excellent suggestion! That option does exactly what my lookup is doing in a
much more reliable and efficient manner. I had glossed over that option
because its documentation describes in so much detail the handling of IP
addresses, I assumed
Dňa 21. apríla 2023 13:40:47 UTC používateľ Jeremy Harris via Exim-users
napísal:
>per_addr can only be used in the rcpt acl.
>You'd possibly be able to just use count=1,
>if this was and event raised once per thing
>you want counted.
OK i got idea, thanks.
Previously i did wrong decision,
On 21/04/2023 13:13, Slavko via Exim-users wrote:
it can
be related to per_addr option
per_addr can only be used in the rcpt acl.
You'd possibly be able to just use count=1,
if this was and event raised once per thing
you want counted.
--
Cheers,
Jeremy
--
## List details at
Dňa 21. apríla 2023 8:23:50 UTC používateľ Jeremy Harris via Exim-users
napísal:
>On 21/04/2023 06:55, Slavko via Exim-users wrote:
>> Did i something wrong?
>
>Would need the actual error message to guess.
OK, i have not exact message already, but IIRC it can
be related to per_addr option, as
On 21/04/2023 06:55, Slavko via Exim-users wrote:
Did i something wrong?
Would need the actual error message to guess.
--
Cheers,
Jeremy
--
## 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 -
Dňa 21. apríla 2023 4:43:45 UTC používateľ Jasen Betts via Exim-users
napísal:
>you can detect rejections using event_action
>
>When you detect a fake rejection you could then store the fact in a ratelimit.
>
>the ratelimit can then be tested in the main delivery router (again via a
>${acl...
On 2023-04-20, Lance Lovette via Exim-users wrote:
>> There's a rational basis for an exception for 5xx before MAIL FROM,
>> when the target only has the connection parameters and HELO
>> name to use as a basis for rejection
>
> Unfortunately, Google, in the case of an outright IP-based block,
On 2023-04-20 at 10:47:15 UTC-0400 (Thu, 20 Apr 2023 10:47:15 -0400)
Lance Lovette via Exim-users
is rumored to have said:
There's a rational basis for an exception for 5xx before MAIL FROM,
when the target only has the connection parameters and HELO
name to use as a basis for rejection
On 20/04/2023 15:47, Lance Lovette via Exim-users wrote:
Does Exim have a mechanism to invoke a script with rejected messages
We already told you no.
--
Cheers,
Jeremy
--
## List details at https://lists.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users
## Exim details at http://www.exim.org/
## Please
On Thu, 20 Apr 2023, Lance Lovette via Exim-users wrote:
There's a rational basis for an exception for 5xx before MAIL FROM,
when the target only has the connection parameters and HELO
name to use as a basis for rejection
Unfortunately, Google, in the case of an outright IP-based block,
> There's a rational basis for an exception for 5xx before MAIL FROM,
> when the target only has the connection parameters and HELO
> name to use as a basis for rejection
Unfortunately, Google, in the case of an outright IP-based block, doesn't
reject the message until after DATA has been
On 17/04/2023 14:08, Bill Cole via Exim-users wrote:
There's a rational basis for an exception for 5xx before MAIL FROM, when the
target only has the connection parameters and HELO name to use as a basis for
rejection. Re-routing via a fallback path isn't entirely unjustifiable in that
case,
On Mon, Apr 17, 2023 at 08:54:37AM +0100, Graeme Fowler via Exim-users wrote:
> > How might I configure my routers to ignore an initial 5xx response from the
> > first router and attempt another (and maybe future) deliveries through an
> > alternate router?
>
> If you get a 5xx error from the
• Lance Lovette via Exim-users [2023-04-16 21:01]:
[...]
> How might I configure my routers to ignore an initial 5xx response from the
> first router and attempt another (and maybe future) deliveries through an
> alternate router?
Maybe recipient verification callout facility could be used, and
On 2023-04-17 at 03:54:37 UTC-0400 (Mon, 17 Apr 2023 08:54:37 +0100)
Graeme Fowler via Exim-users
is rumored to have said:
On 17 April 2023 03:08:29 Lance Lovette via Exim-users
wrote:
How might I configure my routers to ignore an initial 5xx response
from the
first router and attempt
> I'm going to make the very obvious and morally correct answer: you don't.
I truly understand and at a basic level agree with that position. I'm
simply trying to balance that with what is analogous to a short-term
network outage. I need to have a failover in place to keep the business
On 17/04/2023 02:01, Lance Lovette via Exim-users wrote:
How might I configure my routers to ignore an initial 5xx response from the
first router and attempt another (and maybe future) deliveries through an
alternate router?
You can't. A permenent error response for a message is definitive.
On 17 April 2023 03:08:29 Lance Lovette via Exim-users
wrote:
How might I configure my routers to ignore an initial 5xx response from the
first router and attempt another (and maybe future) deliveries through an
alternate router?
I'm going to make the very obvious and morally correct answer:
18 matches
Mail list logo
