From: Wietse Venema (wietseporcupine.org)
Date: Tue Aug 24 2010 - 07:48:25 CDT

• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

Charles Marcus:
> On 2010-08-22 8:38 PM, Stan Hoeppner <stanhardwarefreak.com> wrote:
> > Stan Hoeppner put forth on 8/22/2010 7:34 PM:
> >> So if we reverse the scenario and put the "REJECT" first, it's a final
> >> decision? If so, and if I've described the situation correctly, why do
> >> we have this opposite behavior between whitelisting and blacklisting?
> >> If I've not described this correctly, what am I missing?
>
> > Noel's post answered my question, so ignore my previous message.
> >
> > "OK" != accept_it_right_now
>
> I guess I need some clarification now...
>
> My understanding is this is not true if you have all checks under
> recipient_restrictions (and delay_reject enabled) - an OK in this case
> *would* cause the message to be accepted immediately, while a DUNNO
> would skip to the next check.
>
> But in any case, PERMIT/REJECT always happens immediately.
>
> Is this correct?

All smtpd_mumble_restrictions have an implicit PERMIT at the end.

Postfix rejects mail when any of the smtpd_mumble_restrictions
returns REJECT.

I'm sure that this is documented.

        Wietse

• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]