SXAA

[jryden]

Using the sxaa command to put a rule in place, is it possible to specify "If this rule matches stop processing additional rules"?

[ScalixSupport]

sxaa is governed by the features of Local Delivery and Local Delivery doesn't provide for a "stop processing" rule.

The rules are processed in the following order:

Redirection
[User Sanctions]
File
Notify
Forward
Reply
Print
Delete to Wastebasket
[Deliver]

The redirection will not occur if the message is being redirected to a delegate but the message is marked as private.

A Delete autoaction comes in two flavours. The first is a Delete to Wastebasket which does exactly what it says on the tin. The second is a hard delete. This just prevents the Deliver step from taking place.

The autoaction file is *not* processed in order which means that you can have a file containing File, Delete, Reply and the Delete will be processed last.

Cheers

Dave

[jryden]

So in practice if I understand what you just described, correctly... if you use sxaa to set up a filing rule for (a) user(s) and they then set up filing rules of their own, you will essentially end up with the same message in multiple places provided it matches both the sxaa entered rule and what follows?

Real world (unfortunate) example:

I set up a rule for all users to match on SA's spam status header and file it into a junk folder. If the message is correctly identified as SPAM it could (and in this case often will) end up in the SPAM folder as well as in whatever other folder the user has defined based on his/her own criteria in rules processed after the "global" sxaa rule. Ick.

Would it be an enhancement request to be able to use "stop processing further rules if this one matches" with rules created by sxaa or am I missing somethng more fundamental?

[jryden]

yes? no? maybe?

[mhanisch]

So in practice if I understand what you just described, correctly... if you use sxaa to set up a filing rule for (a) user(s) and they then set up filing rules of their own, you will essentially end up with the same message in multiple places provided it matches both the sxaa entered rule and what follows?

Real world (unfortunate) example:

I set up a rule for all users to match on SA's spam status header and file it into a junk folder. If the message is correctly identified as SPAM it could (and in this case often will) end up in the SPAM folder as well as in whatever other folder the user has defined based on his/her own criteria in rules processed after the "global" sxaa rule. Ick.

Hi,

to refer to your example:
The email will NOT show up in the user's "other folder" - after the message has been filed away, it's no longer in the "in basket", so it won't be processed any more.

Take this message with a grain of salt - I have no clue about the scalix internals, but that's how it seems to work here.

HTH,
Michael.

[mhanisch]

Hello Dave!

Delete to Wastebasket
[Deliver]

[...]
A Delete autoaction comes in two flavours. The first is a Delete to Wastebasket which does exactly what it says on the tin. The second is a hard delete. This just prevents the Deliver step from taking place.

Ok, first question:
Is there any way I can use this "hard delete" from SXAA or the rule wizard?
It sounds exactly like what I need (for a "no-reply@example.com" kind of address), but I
haven't heard about this before.

The autoaction file is *not* processed in order which means that you can have a file containing File, Delete, Reply and the Delete will be processed last.

Ok, second question:

What about the order of rules of the same type?
In my example, I have to "redirect" rules:
- the first one (ID 500) filters out messages with the X-Spam-Flag set, i.e. spam emails
are redirected to a special spam box;
this one does not retain a copy in the in tray.

- the second redirect rule just, well, redirects the message to some other account,
BUT retains a copy of the message in the intray.

I would have expected that for rules of the same type, the order in the file would matter,
but now I'm not so sure any more - several messages have been retained in the intray and forwarded to the other account even though they were marked as spam.

Is my assumption correct and the order does matter for rules of the same type?
Or is there really no ordering of these messages?
Or is the problem that the second rule is triggered while the first rule is still processing
the item? (Or to put it another way, if I have a redirect rule w/o retain, does local delivery take place at all?)

Thanks in advance,
Michael.

[dkelly]

Hello Dave!
Ok, first question:
Is there any way I can use this "hard delete" from SXAA or the rule wizard?
It sounds exactly like what I need (for a "no-reply@example.com" kind of address), but I
haven't heard about this before.

See http://www.scalix.com/community/viewtopic.php?t=4822 for details on the new version of sxaa that I have just posted.

The autoaction file is *not* processed in order which means that you can have a file Ok, second question:

What about the order of rules of the same type?
In my example, I have to "redirect" rules:
- the first one (ID 500) filters out messages with the X-Spam-Flag set, i.e. spam emails
are redirected to a special spam box;
this one does not retain a copy in the in tray.

- the second redirect rule just, well, redirects the message to some other account,
BUT retains a copy of the message in the intray.

I would have expected that for rules of the same type, the order in the file would matter,
but now I'm not so sure any more - several messages have been retained in the intray and forwarded to the other account even though they were marked as spam.

Is my assumption correct and the order does matter for rules of the same type?
Or is there really no ordering of these messages?
Or is the problem that the second rule is triggered while the first rule is still processing
the item? (Or to put it another way, if I have a redirect rule w/o retain, does local delivery take place at all?)

Thanks in advance,
Michael.

Typically rules of the same time *are* processed in order however there is a known bug that prevents messages from being deleted if a redirect has also been specified. This is fixed in Scalix 11 and also in the upcoming 10.0.5 maintenance patch.

Cheers

Dave