Re: Sub-addressing ("plus-addressing") questions...

On 15 Oct 2020, at 16:59, Nick wrote: Looks like the relevant RFCs (apart from RFC822, RFC2822 and the ones that followed) seem to be RFC3598 which was later obsoleted by RFC5233 and none of them seem to say what should happen if the delimiter is there multiple times... Neither 3598 nor

Re: Sub-addressing ("plus-addressing") questions...

Hi! On 2020-10-14 3:33 p.m., Phil Stracchino wrote: On 10/14/20 3:20 PM, Nick wrote: I also have to tell the developers of our applications what should be allowed... Good luck with that one. I have encountered INNUMERABLE werb sites which fervently insist that '+' is not a legal character

Re: Sub-addressing ("plus-addressing") questions...

Hi! On 2020-10-14 9:29 p.m., Viktor Dukhovni wrote: On Thu, Oct 15, 2020 at 01:09:33PM +1300, Peter wrote: On 15/10/20 8:20 am, Nick wrote: Is it possible to have more than one "+" sign in the email address, what does Postfix do when it sees that, does it stop at the first one and considers

Re: Sub-addressing ("plus-addressing") questions...

On Thu, Oct 15, 2020 at 01:09:33PM +1300, Peter wrote: > On 15/10/20 8:20 am, Nick wrote: > > Is it possible to have more than one "+" sign in the email address, what > > does Postfix do when it sees that, does it stop at the first one and > > considers everything that follow a sub-addres? > >

Re: Sub-addressing ("plus-addressing") questions...

On 15/10/20 8:20 am, Nick wrote: Is it possible to have more than one "+" sign in the email address, what does Postfix do when it sees that, does it stop at the first one and considers everything that follow a sub-addres? Yes. Postfix uses the strcspn() C function to do the split which

Re: Sub-addressing ("plus-addressing") questions...

On 10/14/20 3:20 PM, Nick wrote: > I also have to tell the developers of our applications what should be > allowed... Good luck with that one. I have encountered INNUMERABLE werb sites which fervently insist that '+' is not a legal character in an email address. > Is it possible to have more

Sub-addressing ("plus-addressing") questions...

uot; has to know how to deal with sub-addressing ("plus-addressing"), the server which sends the email could be unable to deal with those kind of addresses as long as it is not involved in delivering the mail to the "mailbox" there should not be a problem, is that right? I

Re: Plus addressing on Sentora using Postfix

Wietse Venema: > Philip McGaw: > > >> Mar 11 17:48:08 njoror postfix/pipe[32605]: 1BAF055AB6: > > >> to=, relay=dovecot, delay=0.43, > > >> delays=0.34/0.01/0/0.09, dsn=4.1.1, status=SOFTBOUNCE (user unknown) > > Hint: >>>DOVECOT<<< says "user unknown:". As Viktor

Re: Plus addressing on Sentora using Postfix

Philip McGaw: > >> Mar 11 17:48:08 njoror postfix/pipe[32605]: 1BAF055AB6: > >> to=, relay=dovecot, delay=0.43, > >> delays=0.34/0.01/0/0.09, dsn=4.1.1, status=SOFTBOUNCE (user unknown) Hint: >>>DOVECOT<<< says "user unknown:". Wietse

Re: [+] Re: Plus addressing on Sentora using Postfix

;> client=mr11p26im-asmtp004.me.com[17.110.86.109] >>>>>> Mar 11 17:49:24 njoror postfix/cleanup[32710]: 33D2355AB9: >>>>>> message-id=<2456dc97-4e3a-4a91-b3a0-cafe056f1...@icloud.com> >>>>>> Mar 11 17:49:24 njoror postfix/qmgr[32599]:

Re: Plus addressing on Sentora using Postfix

> On 7 Apr 2016, at 21:44, Julio Cesar Covolato wrote: > > > Em 07/04/2016 17:19, Philip McGaw escreveu: >> Is there something I can add to this to help with getting an answer to what >> I need to do to get this working? >> >> Sent from my iPhone >> >>> On 6 Apr 2016, at

Re: Plus addressing on Sentora using Postfix

33D2355AB9: >>>> to=<s...@skippy.org.uk>, relay=dovecot, delay=1.8, delays=0.63/0/0/1.2, >>>> dsn=2.0.0, status=sent (delivered via dovecot service) >>>> Mar 11 17:49:26 njoror postfix/qmgr[32599]: 33D2355AB9: removed >>> >>> Looking at the lines from mail.log it looks like it thinks there should be >>> a user called site+t...@skippy.org.uk, this has been puzzling me for a >>> while, I was wondering if any one on here could see what was wrong, and >>> what I needed to change, Looking at a few examples and online guides I >>> thought I had covered all the bases. > And the correct way is send to: <real_user+anyth...@skippy.org.uk> s...@skippy.org.uk is a real user. site+t...@mcgaw.eu is the test of plus addressing failing.

Re: Plus addressing on Sentora using Postfix

Is there something I can add to this to help with getting an answer to what I need to do to get this working? Sent from my iPhone > On 6 Apr 2016, at 22:29, Philip McGaw wrote: > > I am running Ubuntu Ubuntu 14.04.4 LTS “Trusty” and "postconf -d | grep > mail_version” gives

Plus addressing on Sentora using Postfix

I am running Ubuntu Ubuntu 14.04.4 LTS “Trusty” and "postconf -d | grep mail_version” gives me “mail_version = 2.11.0”. I have installed Sentora (http://sentora.org) which sets most of the configuration up for Postfix up, I have made some changes to allow me to use certificates for IMAP and

Re: Plus Addressing

Jeff Grossman a écrit : On 4/22/2009 12:17 PM, Mark Martinec wrote: Jeff, One more thing I noticed today also. All messages which have the + in the e-mail are sent to Dovecot's Deliver twice. So, I receive the message twice in the folder. All other messages are only sent to Deliver

Re: Plus Addressing

Jeff, One more thing I noticed today also. All messages which have the + in the e-mail are sent to Dovecot's Deliver twice. So, I receive the message twice in the folder. All other messages are only sent to Deliver once. Any idea what I have configured wrong for the message to be

Re: Plus Addressing

On 4/22/2009 12:17 PM, Mark Martinec wrote: Jeff, One more thing I noticed today also. All messages which have the + in the e-mail are sent to Dovecot's Deliver twice. So, I receive the message twice in the folder. All other messages are only sent to Deliver once. Any idea what I have

Re: Plus Addressing

On 16-Apr-2009, at 23:44, Victor Duchovni wrote: Don't use mailbox_command, use mailbox_transport (assuming that in your case deliver can work acceptably running as a fixed pipe(8) user rather than as the recipient). The recipient extension in local(8) deliveries is converted to lower-case

Re: Plus Addressing

On 4/16/2009 10:44 PM, Victor Duchovni wrote: On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 08:24:54PM -0700, Jeff Grossman wrote: I have set up recipient_delimiter = + so I could put a folder name in an e-mail address and have it automatically filtered for me. I am using mailbox_command =

Re: Plus Addressing

On 4/17/2009 6:54 AM, Jeff Grossman wrote: On 4/16/2009 10:44 PM, Victor Duchovni wrote: On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 08:24:54PM -0700, Jeff Grossman wrote: I have set up recipient_delimiter = + so I could put a folder name in an e-mail address and have it automatically filtered for me. I am

Re: Plus Addressing

Jeff Grossman wrote: On 4/16/2009 10:44 PM, Victor Duchovni wrote: On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 08:24:54PM -0700, Jeff Grossman wrote: I have set up recipient_delimiter = + so I could put a folder name in an e-mail address and have it automatically filtered for me. I am using

Re: Plus Addressing

On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 10:11:36AM -0400, Brian Evans - Postfix List wrote: Thanks for the information. The problem I have with that is all of my users are local system users. I don't think I can use mailbox_transport with local users only virtual users. It appears the only way I can

Re: Plus Addressing

Victor Duchovni: On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 10:11:36AM -0400, Brian Evans - Postfix List wrote: Thanks for the information. The problem I have with that is all of my users are local system users. I don't think I can use mailbox_transport with local users only virtual users. It appears

Re: Plus Addressing

On 4/17/2009 7:11 AM, Brian Evans - Postfix List wrote: Jeff Grossman wrote: On 4/16/2009 10:44 PM, Victor Duchovni wrote: On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 08:24:54PM -0700, Jeff Grossman wrote: I have set up recipient_delimiter = + so I could put a folder name in an e-mail address

Re: Plus Addressing

On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 11:13:59AM -0400, Wietse Venema wrote: Victor Duchovni: On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 10:11:36AM -0400, Brian Evans - Postfix List wrote: Thanks for the information. The problem I have with that is all of my users are local system users. I don't think I can use

Re: Plus Addressing

On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 08:16:17AM -0700, Jeff Grossman wrote: Thanks for the help and information. I am going to see if I can figure out how to configure Dovecot to use mailbox_transport with system users. Works here for Cyrus IMAP. The key question is who owns the mailboxes, and how does

Re: Plus Addressing

Victor Duchovni: On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 11:13:59AM -0400, Wietse Venema wrote: Victor Duchovni: On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 10:11:36AM -0400, Brian Evans - Postfix List wrote: Thanks for the information. The problem I have with that is all of my users are local system

Re: Plus Addressing

Jeff, One more thing I noticed today also. All messages which have the + in the e-mail are sent to Dovecot's Deliver twice. So, I receive the message twice in the folder. All other messages are only sent to Deliver once. Any idea what I have configured wrong for the message to be sent

Re: Plus Addressing

On 4/17/2009 9:08 AM, Mark Martinec wrote: Jeff, One more thing I noticed today also. All messages which have the + in the e-mail are sent to Dovecot's Deliver twice. So, I receive the message twice in the folder. All other messages are only sent to Deliver once. Any idea what I have

Plus Addressing

I have set up recipient_delimiter = + so I could put a folder name in an e-mail address and have it automatically filtered for me. I am using mailbox_command = /usr/local/libexec/dovecot/deliver -n -m $EXTENSION as my mailbox_command. When the mail gets passed to deliver, the extension is

Re: Plus Addressing

On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 08:24:54PM -0700, Jeff Grossman wrote: I have set up recipient_delimiter = + so I could put a folder name in an e-mail address and have it automatically filtered for me. I am using mailbox_command = /usr/local/libexec/dovecot/deliver -n -m $EXTENSION as my

Re: Plus Addressing

On 16-Apr-2009, at 21:24, Jeff Grossman wrote: Is there a way for me to not have Postfix change the case? I had a similar issue where postfix (well, or something) was NOT changing the case on some virtual users $USER portion. I solved it with the following in the procmailrc file: :0D *

Re: Plus addressing not delivering to folder

Charles Marcus wrote: On 3/7/2009 1:45 PM, LuKreme wrote: Yes, I was planning on allowing any extension to be used/made up on the fly... thje purpose for using the extension will be for signing up for different sites/lists/things, so I can use the same address, but be able to distinguish

Re: Plus addressing not delivering to folder

On Sun, 08 Mar 2009, KLaM Postmaster wrote: Ok, I'm intrigued... if it is this simple, maybe I'll go ahead and do it, but... As I said in an earlier mail, I do NOT want the folder auto-created - if it doesn't exist, I want the message deliver to fall back to the Inbox... Is there a

Re: Plus addressing not delivering to folder

Charles Marcus a écrit : On 3/6/2009 3:43 PM, LuKreme wrote: On 6-Mar-2009, at 12:27, Charles Marcus wrote: Hmmm... I'm now wondering if ${extension} can somehow be used with the virtual_mailbox_maps query to accomplish what I want? Yes, but you need procmail (or, I assume, Maildrop)

Re: Plus addressing not delivering to folder

On 3/7/2009, mouss (mo...@ml.netoyen.net) wrote: if all extensions are acceptable (not very recommended), Ok, this caught my attention... Yes, I was planning on allowing any extension to be used/made up on the fly... thje purpose for using the extension will be for signing up for different

Re: Plus addressing not delivering to folder

Charles Marcus wrote: On 3/7/2009, mouss (mo...@ml.netoyen.net) wrote: if all extensions are acceptable (not very recommended), Ok, this caught my attention... Yes, I was planning on allowing any extension to be used/made up on the fly... thje purpose for using the extension will be for

Re: Plus addressing not delivering to folder

On 3/7/2009, Noel Jones (njo...@megan.vbhcs.org) wrote: Some third-party IMAP servers may support deliver to any extension subfolder, I haven't looked. They do... both cyrus and dovecot, and I think courier maildrop does as well... Since I'm going to be converting to dovecot soon, I'll be

Re: Plus addressing not delivering to folder

On Sat, Mar 07, 2009 at 10:44:54AM -0500, Charles Marcus wrote: On 3/7/2009, Noel Jones (njo...@megan.vbhcs.org) wrote: Some third-party IMAP servers may support deliver to any extension subfolder, I haven't looked. They do... both cyrus and dovecot, and I think courier maildrop does as

Re: Plus addressing not delivering to folder

On 7-Mar-2009, at 08:11, Charles Marcus wrote: On 3/7/2009, mouss (mo...@ml.netoyen.net) wrote: if all extensions are acceptable (not very recommended), Ok, this caught my attention... Yes, I was planning on allowing any extension to be used/made up on the fly... thje purpose for using

Re: Plus addressing not delivering to folder

On 7-Mar-2009, at 08:39, Noel Jones wrote: Postfix does not allow $1 etc. substitution in virtual_mailbox_maps. http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#virtual_mailbox_maps It is pretty easy to set up a procmail transport to be used by postfix: procmail unix - n n - -

Re: Plus addressing not delivering to folder

Noel Jones a écrit : Charles Marcus wrote: On 3/7/2009, mouss (mo...@ml.netoyen.net) wrote: if all extensions are acceptable (not very recommended), Ok, this caught my attention... Yes, I was planning on allowing any extension to be used/made up on the fly... thje purpose for using the

Re: Plus addressing not delivering to folder

On 3/7/2009 1:45 PM, LuKreme wrote: Yes, I was planning on allowing any extension to be used/made up on the fly... thje purpose for using the extension will be for signing up for different sites/lists/things, so I can use the same address, but be able to distinguish mail that comes to me via

Re: Plus addressing not delivering to folder

On 7-Mar-2009, at 12:13, Charles Marcus wrote: As I said in an earlier mail, I do NOT want the folder auto-created - if it doesn't exist, I want the message deliver to fall back to the Inbox... Is there a way to tweak the above to accomplish this? Sure, you can do most anything in

Re: Plus addressing not delivering to folder

Charles Marcus a écrit : On 3/7/2009 1:45 PM, LuKreme wrote: Yes, I was planning on allowing any extension to be used/made up on the fly... thje purpose for using the extension will be for signing up for different sites/lists/things, so I can use the same address, but be able to distinguish

Re: Plus addressing not delivering to folder

On Fri, Mar 06, 2009 at 02:27:56PM -0500, Charles Marcus wrote: It would be nice if the postfix local and/or virtual DA master.cf entries allowed the addition of these flags to be able to do this... I guess in this situation I'll have to wait until I have converted to dovecot so I can use

Re: Plus addressing not delivering to folder

Charles Marcus: Obviously (also judging from the replies so far), the postfix DA's don't support adding flags to accomplish this, like you can with the dovecot LDA master.cf entry. So, an obvious follow-up would be, is there a reason postfix's DAs don't support this? I'm not complaining, just

Re: Plus addressing not delivering to folder

On 6-Mar-2009, at 12:27, Charles Marcus wrote: Hmmm... I'm now wondering if ${extension} can somehow be used with the virtual_mailbox_maps query to accomplish what I want? Yes, but you need procmail (or, I assume, Maildrop) in a procmail file you would have: # based on the procmail pipe in

Re: Plus addressing not delivering to folder

On 3/6/2009 3:43 PM, LuKreme wrote: On 6-Mar-2009, at 12:27, Charles Marcus wrote: Hmmm... I'm now wondering if ${extension} can somehow be used with the virtual_mailbox_maps query to accomplish what I want? Yes, but you need procmail (or, I assume, Maildrop) Many thanks for the detail...

Re: Plus addressing not delivering to folder

Charles Marcus wrote, at 03/06/2009 02:27 PM: I want to be able to use plussed addresses in such a way that if such a message comes in and a subfolder matches the extension, the message will be delivered to that subfolder, and if there is no matching subfolder, it is just delivered to the

Plus addressing not delivering to folder

Hello, I'm sure this is something I'm totally missing but I have a system I'm trying to get plus addressing working, and not having any luck. The email is delivered, but just to the Inbox, not to the folder... I've got the recipient delimiter enabled in main.cf (output of postconf -n shows

Re: Plus addressing not delivering to folder

Charles Marcus wrote: Hello, I'm sure this is something I'm totally missing but I have a system I'm trying to get plus addressing working, and not having any luck. The email is delivered, but just to the Inbox, not to the folder... I've got the recipient delimiter enabled in main.cf (output

Re: Plus addressing not delivering to folder

On Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 05:48:35PM -0500, Charles Marcus wrote: I'm sure this is something I'm totally missing but I have a system I'm trying to get plus addressing working, and not having any luck. The email is delivered, but just to the Inbox, not to the folder... Plus addressing is working

Re: Plus addressing not delivering to folder

Charles Marcus a écrit : Hello, I'm sure this is something I'm totally missing but I have a system I'm trying to get plus addressing working, and not having any luck. The email is delivered, but just to the Inbox, not to the folder... I've got the recipient delimiter enabled in main.cf

Re: Plus addressing not delivering to folder

On 27-Feb-2009, at 15:48, Charles Marcus wrote: I'm sure this is something I'm totally missing but I have a system I'm trying to get plus addressing working, and not having any luck. The email is delivered, but just to the Inbox, not to the folder... It is not postfix's job to deliver