Carlos E. R. wrote:

> So far, so good. Or maybe not so good, the local user is not well defined.
> 
> The next step, is to put that into the local folder, by postfix. But 
> postfix expands "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" into "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" 
> (I have no idea why, I don't know how he has it configured).
> 
> Next, postfix thinks that the destination of that email is not local (the 
> "localhost" past has been lost), so postfix tries to send it to 
> "growngizmo.de".

And that is most likely the problem. If Postfix doesn't know which domains
are local it is trying to relay the mail.

> And mail to "growngizmo.de" happens to be handled by "mailin.rzone.de".
> 
> It is this "growngizmo.de", aka "mailin.rzone.de" who rejects the email 
> for coming from a dynamic address. It is not the combination of 
> fetchmail/postfix who is responsible for the rejection. It is his own ISP 
> who is doing the rejection:

He probably didn't configure smtp auth for the client part of Postfix, so
Postfix tries to submit the mail directly to the responsible mailserver.

> 
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (expanded from <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>): host
>     mailin.rzone.de[81.169.145.100] said: 550 5.0.0 Dial-Up IP address 
> rejected
>     (in reply to RCPT TO command)
> 
> 
> What happens now is that our "friend's" postfix now have a rejected 
> email... so it sends it back... to us.

Correct. In my case he tries to send it to me.

    554 5.7.1 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: Recipient address
rejected: Access denied; from=<> to=<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
proto=ESMTP helo=<dothangizmo.gk.lan> (total: 45)
          45   p549B18A2.dip0.t-ipconnect.de
    554 5.7.1 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: Recipient address
rejected: Access denied; from=<> to=<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
proto=ESMTP helo=<dothangizmo.gk.lan> (total: 170)
         170   p549B18A2.dip0.t-ipconnect.de

> 
> The error is in fetchmail not translating to the correct local user name.
> Plus, if it is a multidrop, I don't think you can handle it with procmail 
> directly.
> 
> But the fault is not fetchmail nor postfix: it is our friend's fault for 
> not doing checks and configuring properly his setup.

The usual diagnosis: the problem is sitting in front of the keyboard.

-- 
Sandy

List replies only please!
Please address PMs to: news-reply2 (@) japantest (.) homelinux (.) com
-- 
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to