Milter-greylist

I understand where you are coming from, and in most cases I'd agree: backward compatibility is critical from a user point of view.

In this situation, however, I think the current dacl implementation is so immature that I'd be surprised that a lot of people are actually using it in production.

Let's see what the mailing list members have to say. How are they using the dacl commands right now, and will they be affected by any of the proposals?

Rudy.

--- In milter-greylist@yahoogroups.com, manu@... wrote:
>
> Rudy Eschauzier <reschauzier@...> wrote:
> 
> > 1. Introduce a new keyword, e.g 'skipdacl'
> >
> > 2. Only have messages that get greylisted by a racl command pass through
> > the dacl stage. All globally whitelisted messages (through auth or global
> > spf for example) whill skip dacl, as will auto-white listed messages.
> >
> > 3. Base the precedence of dacl over racl commands on the line number.
> 
> I have concerns with options 2 and 3 because they modify the way
> existing setups work. skipdacl looks better to me (I disklike the name,
> though, but this is not a big concern)"
> 
> 
> -- 
> Emmanuel Dreyfus
> http://hcpnet.free.fr/pubz
> manu@...
>