On 9/18/2013 8:09 AM, li...@sbt.net.au wrote: > On Wed, September 18, 2013 2:54 pm, Stan Hoeppner wrote: >> On 9/17/2013 10:40 PM, Viktor Dukhovni wrote: > >>>> reject_non_fqdn_sender, reject_non_fqdn_recipient, >>>> reject_invalid_hostname, reject_non_fqdn_hostname, >>> This should have blocked the example message, but did not. Why? >> He's using Postfix 2.6.6. The parms in his current config that would >> have triggered are for 2.2 or older, thus ignored I assume. He should be >> using >> reject_invalid_helo_hostname reject_non_fqdn_helo_hostname >> which should trigger on this. > > I've updated the syntax as per above, BUT, my fault was that the address > in question was exempted in "recipient_no_checks",
I only work with what I can verify. You didn't provide the contents of recipient_no_checks. I try not to guess as that gets you into trouble. The only thing verifiably wrong was the syntax of those two restrictions. > for other users, the old-syntax was working, now updated That's strange. Usually when new syntax is introduced the old syntax is removed and no longer works. 2.3 -> 2.6 seems a rather long grace period. Does the pre 2.3 syntax still work today? -- Stan
