On Sun, 2010-05-09 at 14:34 +0100, Jeremy Harris wrote: > On 05/09/2010 08:16 AM, Ron White wrote: > > On Sun, 2010-05-09 at 12:31 +1000, Ted Cooper wrote: > >> This doesn't seem like a job for address rewriting. I just use a catch > >> all router at the end with specific conditions. > >> > >> I have a very old setup that will catch all crap sent to a domain I > >> specify in a directory. I should have changed this ages ago into > >> something more useful, but not many people use a catch all so it's not > >> something I want to change. > >> > >> Anyway, If I have a domain I want to catch all on, I "touch > >> /etc/exim/catchalladdress/<domain to catch>" and then this router > >> sitting at the bottom of my routers does the rest: > >> > >> # last router before default reject > >> catchall: > >> driver = redirect > >> domains = dsearch;/etc/exim/catchalladdress > >> data = catch...@$domain > >> cannot_route_message = Unknown user > >> > >> .. well, except that I also add an alias on that domain called > >> "catchall" which redirects itself to whatever account you want, OR just > >> create an account called catchall that collects everything. > >> > >> If you want, you can keep the original recipients by adding them as a > >> header. > >> > >> I only run a catch all so I can make up email addresses on the fly on a > >> spam/bacon trap only domain. Very useful for tagging which site which > >> addresses were entered into. Other than that, they're evil. > >> > >> > >> > > Hi Ted, > > > > Thanks for that. It's a little more complex in my set up because Exim > > handles mail for: > > > > 1. Locally hosted domains and recipients > > 2. Remote/relay to domains and recipients > > 3. Remote/relay domain may also have users locally hosted user > > accounts(such as postmaster/abuse/notifications). > > > > The catch-all is dynamic. The user can change the local part > > The we're talking at cross-purposes. Catchall, to me, means > that any local-part (for some particular domain) is accepted. That's right. The issue is the domain may be local or remote and the dynamic address needs to be verified. > > which means > > (1) the final catch-all recipient needs to be verified so we don't > > accept mail for something we can't deliver (2) that catch all could be a > > locally routed account, a remote smtp destination (sub classes of 'by > > ip, by hostname, by mx) (3) the per-user settings of the destination > > catch all, which are set in the ACL's, would not be honoured potentially > > leading to spam/viruses flowing through unchecked. As far as I > > understand it using a router to do it means that you have accepted the > > message at that point. > > Not if you do recipient-verification in your RCPT acl. That calls the > routers. But for locally hosted 'virtual' users I'm doing this in an ACL and checking against a mysql database. The reason for this is my lowest 'unit' is a recipient, not a domain. [email protected] may be a locally hosted user belonging to domain foo.bar, but [email protected] may be on a different host. The 'host' data could be of three types, an ip address, a hostname lookup or an mx lookup. The consensus was mixed when I asked about this and we arrived at an ACL being the best way to control this. Relay destinations are verified with a callout. > > - Jeremy > I'm working on plan-b, but thanks for the reply. Appreciated.
-- ## List details at http://lists.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users ## Exim details at http://www.exim.org/ ## Please use the Wiki with this list - http://wiki.exim.org/
