On Fri, Aug 25, 2006 at 11:37:06PM +0900, AIDA Shinra wrote:
> 1. What is the advantage of giving names to macro conditions rather
> than the following syntax? Line length?
Yes, line length, and avoid replicating the same macro value in
multiple rules.
> acl greylist macro "{client_resolve}" "FORGED"
> list "bad_macros" macro "{foobar}" { "foo" "bar" }
That list has a somewhat different semantic than the other ones: we
would have a list of macro values instead of having a list of
(macro name, macro value) tuples. It would be a bit confusing.
> 2. If we introduce your sm_macro syntax, we need to consider the
> sm_macro as a part of ACL rather than config. The sm_macro must be
> protected by the ACL lock and may be inconsistent with the config.
Yes, it can be directly derived from what is currently done for dnsrbl.
--
Emmanuel Dreyfus
manu@...Message
Re: [milter-greylist] RFC: checking sendmail macros in ACL
2006-08-25 by Emmanuel Dreyfus
Attachments
- No local attachments were found for this message.