Neohapsis is currently accepting applications for employment. For more information, please visit our website www.neohapsis.com or email firstname.lastname@example.org
From: Victor Duchovni (Victor.Duchovnimorganstanley.com)
Date: Mon May 05 2008 - 10:05:06 CDT
On Mon, May 05, 2008 at 03:07:06PM +0200, postfix wrote:
> I did not want to do actions that depend on multiple patterns matching.
> Let me explain a bit deeper for I guess that my question was confusing.
> I wanted to potentially apply a FILTER action on both the header_checks
> and the mime_header_ckecks parameters and to be able to apply a priority
> for one of the 2 tables
> Something like that
> for the header_checks
> /^From: alain/ FILTER smtp:127.0.0.1:10026
> and for the mime_header_ckecks
> /^Content-type: message\/delivery-status$/ FILTER smtp:[127.0.0.1]:27
> Making test it seems that I can not invert the priority for these tables
> (if both match of course). The header_checks table has a higher priority
> than the mime_header_ckecks table.
No, there is no priority, headers get evaluated in the order in which they
occur in the message. The last FILTER setting wins. The Content-Type:
message/delivery status header is the header of a MIME part, and so
always follows the "From:" header. With other header combinations,
the order could be less predictable.
If you want to do boolean algebra on header features you can't do it
with header checks. Postfix only implements simple one header at a time
lookup you seem to want something like "Sieve".
Disclaimer: off-list followups get on-list replies or get ignored.
Please do not ignore the "Reply-To" header.
To unsubscribe from the postfix-users list, visit
http://www.postfix.org/lists.html or click the link below:
If my response solves your problem, the best way to thank me is to not
send an "it worked, thanks" follow-up. If you must respond, please put
"It worked, thanks" in the "Subject" so I can delete these quickly.