On Sun, Feb 11, 2024 at 07:13:38PM +1300, Peter via Postfix-users wrote:
> Right, and further to that a 554 response at connection time is a rejection
> of the *connection*. No attempt was ever made to send the *message*, so in
> a manner of speaking the message is still valid and a different
On 11/02/24 13:51, Doug Hardie via Postfix-users wrote:
If I am understanding correctly, that means that if I set smtp_skip_5xx_greeting to
"no", then postfix would stop after the first 5xx and terminate the email.
That seems like it might open up some issues where a provider with multiple
> On Feb 10, 2024, at 15:55, Wietse Venema via Postfix-users
> wrote:
>
> Doug Hardie via Postfix-users:
>> I used Viktor's collate to trace a specific email handling. There were a
>> number of these entries. However, I am only showing 2 of them:
>>
>
> This is host
On 2024-02-10 at 18:33:29 UTC-0500 (Sat, 10 Feb 2024 15:33:29 -0800)
Doug Hardie via Postfix-users
is rumored to have said:
> I used Viktor's collate to trace a specific email handling. There were a
> number of these entries. However, I am only showing 2 of them:
>
> Feb 10 03:15:40 mail
Wietse Venema via Postfix-users:
> Doug Hardie via Postfix-users:
> > I used Viktor's collate to trace a specific email handling. There were a
> > number of these entries. However, I am only showing 2 of them:
> >
>
> This is host mx01.t-online.de[194.25.134.72]:
>
> > Feb 10 03:15:40 mail
Doug Hardie via Postfix-users:
> I used Viktor's collate to trace a specific email handling. There were a
> number of these entries. However, I am only showing 2 of them:
>
This is host mx01.t-online.de[194.25.134.72]:
> Feb 10 03:15:40 mail postfix/smtp[60428]: 4TWjVT5qz7z2gF8w:
> to=,
>
I used Viktor's collate to trace a specific email handling. There were a
number of these entries. However, I am only showing 2 of them:
Feb 10 03:15:40 mail postfix/smtp[60428]: 4TWjVT5qz7z2gF8w:
to=,
orig_to=,
relay=mx01.t-online.de[194.25.134.72]:25, delay=59371, delays=59369/0.02/1.5/0,
