Re: How to drop the recipient address hostname when delivering mail via LMTP?

On 27.08.10 17:58, Noel Jones wrote: If you're using the postfix LMTP client, this might work: http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#lmtp_generic_maps I've added lmtp_generic_maps = hash:$config_directory/lmtp_generic to main.cf. The file's content matches your example, but I don't see

Re: How to drop the recipient address hostname when delivering mail via LMTP?

On 27.08.10 18:22, Victor Duchovni wrote: [...] LMTP servers are expected to correctly map domains to mailboxes. It is best to no generate invalid LMTP, mangle the headers, ... Good point. The data available for Dovecot's user/password DB lookups does not yet contain domain information for

Re: How to drop the recipient address hostname when delivering mail via LMTP?

On 27.08.10 21:06, fakessh wrote: What is the best solution to use dovecot lda for its use or complicate the config using lmtp dovecot whereas with a simple config we manage to walk amavisd Sorry, I don't get your meaning. If you are asking about using the dovecot-lda binary instead of LMTP

local_recipient_maps with LDAP

Hello Everybody I wan't to have my local recipeints checked against my Active Directory. So I have created the .cf file with the LDAP parameters: bind_dn = u...@domain.local bind_pw = ** server_host = 192.168.8.254 #Global Catalog port server_port = 3268 search_base =

Re: local_recipient_maps with LDAP

* Marco Rebsamen mrebsa...@unimatrix0.ch: I wan't to have my local recipeints checked against my Active Directory. So I have created the .cf file with the LDAP parameters: bind_dn = u...@domain.local bind_pw = ** server_host = 192.168.8.254 #Global Catalog port server_port = 3268

Re: local_recipient_maps with LDAP

* Marco Rebsamen mrebsa...@unimatrix0.ch: I see If i got multiple domains, what do i do ? Something like this ? query_filter = (proxyaddresses...@%d) Only one domain can be your local domain. All other domains are virtual domains. Create two ldap query files. Local domain: query_filter

Re: Lookup key of smtp_tls_policy_maps

also sprach Victor Duchovni victor.ducho...@morganstanley.com [2010.08.27.1946 +0200]: The recipient's domain *is* the nexthop destination. Don't confuse with the *nexthop* that is the input to DNS MX lookups with the output of the DNS lookup which returns hostnames. Okay, thanks for clearing

Log the applied TLS policy

Dear list, We are using $smtp_tls_policy_maps, in addition to $smtp_tls_security_level==may. Hence, the machine opportunistically uses TLS, while the policy ensures that certain destinations are protected by trusted and secure channels. Due to some issues we've been having[0], I would like to

Re: Baffled by User unknown in virtual alias table

On Fri, 2010-08-27 at 16:51 -0400, Wietse Venema wrote: Adam Tauno Williams: virtual_alias_maps: ldap:/etc/postfix/ldap-delivery.cf(0,lock|fold_fix): adam.t.willi...@example.com = ot...@example.com As DOCUMENTED, virtual alias domains MUST replace the recipient domain by a DIFFERENT

postmap -q and address extensions

Hello list, I am finding that postmap -q address+withextens...@domain.com pgsql:/etc/postfix/virtual_mailbox_maps does not return a result, while the address without the extension works fine. Is this expected behaviour? -- martin | http://madduck.net/ | http://two.sentenc.es/ the problem

Re: Baffled by User unknown in virtual alias table

Adam Tauno Williams: On Fri, 2010-08-27 at 16:51 -0400, Wietse Venema wrote: Adam Tauno Williams: virtual_alias_maps: ldap:/etc/postfix/ldap-delivery.cf(0,lock|fold_fix): adam.t.willi...@example.com = ot...@example.com As DOCUMENTED, virtual alias domains MUST replace the recipient

Re: postmap -q and address extensions

martin f krafft: Hello list, I am finding that postmap -q address+withextens...@domain.com pgsql:/etc/postfix/virtual_mailbox_maps does not return a result, while the address without the extension works fine. Is this expected behaviour? YES. Wietse

Re: postmap -q and address extensions

also sprach Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org [2010.08.28.2330 +0200]: does not return a result, while the address without the extension works fine. Is this expected behaviour? YES. Thank you. -- martin | http://madduck.net/ | http://two.sentenc.es/ common sense is the collection of

Re: postmap -q and address extensions

martin f krafft: also sprach Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org [2010.08.28.2330 +0200]: does not return a result, while the address without the extension works fine. Is this expected behaviour? YES. Thank you. You're welcome. By now you will be aware that postmap does not know