On Thu, Sep 10, 2015 at 10:06:24PM +0200, Francis Brosnan Blázquez wrote: > > > 1) We need that "FILTER transp2:", through the delegation protocol, to > > > setup different outgoing IP (it seems there's no other way to do this), > > > > By sender: > > > > > > http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#sender_dependent_default_transport_maps > > > > Outgoing IP by recipient domain is just normal transport lookup > > (with the IP address part of the master.cf transport definition). > > Yes, but this doesn't work if you need to adjust outgoing IP based on > the sasl user (published solutions insist on using FILTER :-( [1])
Then perhaps we should provide a way of doing the same thing by SASL login. Both the envelope address and the SASL login name are really features of the sender. The original purpose of the feature (in the form of a sender dependent relay host) was to allow users to relay mail through the right email provider that hosts the mailbox for the sender address, and might have DKIM, SPF, ... I don't think that we're going out of our way to facilitate snow-show bulk-email (possibly legitimate, and just dealing with real obstacles, or at times trying to flying under the radar with less legitimate content). So there's a limit to how much effort in that direction is likely in the mainstream Postfix distribution. What are the legitimate use-cases for transport for SASL id? > > Postfix is not a one-stop-shopping solution for a snow-shoe spam > > MTA. Removing pesky recipients like me who'll report the sender > > to RBL maintainers and abuse departments needs to happen in the > > upstream lists, not in the MTA. Turn-away customers with harvested > > lists, or you'll find your outbound IPs on RBLs. > > :-) Hehe...I'd really like to (turn away those customers), but daily > life reality is far from there... > > Anyway, certainly, that "FILTER" for transport selection we are doing is > very disruptive (according to postfix way of doing things). I'll take me > time to review this, > > [1] http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.mail.postfix.user/250046 Well, that works provided you don't also try to do any interesting per-recipient routing (e.g. routing to discard(8)). There isn't at present a "DEFAULT ..." access(5) directive that instead of "FILTER", which preempts routing, sets the default transport. This would have to write a new record into the queue-file that the queue-manager would then convey to trivial-rewrite(8) in the "resolve" protocol request (which would need to change), so that trivial-rewrite would return the per-message default transport. Can't estimate the likelihood of this becoming an official feature. -- Viktor.
