| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
> >I've tried other approaches, > >but they don't work: > > > >first_restriction = > > check_client_access static:WARN blah blah blah, > > permit > > Right. static: accepts an action, not comments. More accurately the retriction list parser is much less clever than the OP imagines. Commas and white-space are equivalent, and new lines and indentation don't signal any special semantics. The first "blah" after "static:WARN" is treated as the next restriction rule. The "static" map type would happily return a more complex result, but there is no way to specify this without new main.cf syntax (some sort of grouping and/or quoting, ...). -- Viktor. 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: <mailto:majordomo?body=unsubscribe%20postfix-users> 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.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
© 2004-2008 readlist.com