On 29.3.2013 15:28, Wietse Venema wrote:
The archive copy must be submitted asynchronously, just like email is delivered asynchronously, and just like a bounce message is submitted asynchronously.
Of course. It wasn't the asynchronicity I was questioning.
For the archive service to be a delivery agent, Postfix should produce sensible behavior when people send mail directly to it with transport_maps or whatever, including all the delivery agent features that can be tweaked such as rate limits, concurrency scheduling, and so on.
Exactly. You would be able to use all these features, in the very same way you can use them for the "error" transport.
For example, if the bounce daemon were an agent that delivers mail to the envelope sender, then that could result in chaos as people configure Postfix to send mail there directly with transport_maps or whatever (what does it mean to deliver mail directly to the "trace" or "success" service, when that mail was submitted with "sendmail -bv" or "sendmail -N success"?) Instead, Postfix has the "error" and "retry" transports (and no transports that correspond to the "success" or "trace" services).
Quite right. But it seems quite reasonable to send something to "archive r...@domain.tld" transport, in the very same way it makes sense to send it to an "error msg" transport. I though of this as an advantage, not a shortcoming.
Anyway, I saw you have been doing pretty cool changes recently, so I am sure that whatever you'll choose will be great in this case as well. I won't be around for few days now, so let me wish you Happy Easter now...
Patrik
