> > >>> Here is what I've done with the typo corrected. Is this a Bad
> > >>> Idea? Are there problems with naively using the domain from the
> > >>> recipient email address as the
> > >>> nexthop value?
> > >>>
> > >>> master.cf:
> > >>>
> > >>> smtp2 unix - - n
> > > The configuration makes absolutely no sense at all.
> >
> > Hmm, I'm not sure why you see *no* sense in it.
>
> If you can configure Postfix to send some email to port 10024 (which
> uses a wild-card access map rule to send out all email via transport
> "smtp2")
>
> Then you can con
> >>> Here is what I've done with the typo corrected. Is this a Bad
> >
> >>> Idea? Are there problems with naively using the domain from the
> >>> recipient email address as the
> >>> nexthop value?
> >>>
> >>> master.cf:
> >>>
> >>> smtp2 unix - - n - -
email builder:
> > The configuration makes absolutely no sense at all.
>
> Hmm, I'm not sure why you see *no* sense in it.
If you can configure Postfix to send some email to port 10024 (which
uses a wild-card access map rule to send out all email via transport
"smtp2")
Then you can configure Po
> > > > Here is what I've done with the typo corrected. Is this a Bad
> >
> > > > Idea? Are there problems with naively using the domain from the
> > > > recipient email address as the
> > > > nexthop value?
> > > >
> > > > master.cf:
> > > >
> > > > smtp2 unix - - n
On 4/5/2011 3:35 PM, email builder wrote:
Here is what I've done with the typo corrected. Is this a Bad
Idea? Are there problems with naively using the domain from the
recipient email address as the
nexthop value?
master.cf:
smtp2 unix - - n- - smtp
email builder:
>
> > > Here is what I've done with the typo corrected. Is this a Bad
>
> > > Idea? Are there problems with naively using the domain from the
> > > recipient email address as the
> > > nexthop value?
> > >
> > > master.cf:
> > >
> > > smtp2 unix - - n-
> > Here is what I've done with the typo corrected. Is this a Bad
> > Idea? Are there problems with naively using the domain from the
> > recipient email address as the
> > nexthop value?
> >
> > master.cf:
> >
> > smtp2 unix - - n- - smtp
> > -
email builder:
> Here is what I've done with the typo corrected. Is this a Bad
> Idea? Are there problems with naively using the domain from the
> recipient email address as the
> nexthop value?
>
> master.cf:
>
> smtp2 unix - - n - - smtp
> -o smtp_bi
> > What I ran into while solving the add-a-header issue (see my last
> > post on this thread) was that I can use a FILTER action from a
> > smtpd_*_restriction check to select a specialized smtp process
> > that is bound to a given IP address.
> >
> >
> > I found, however, that the FILTER
email builder:
> What I ran into while solving the add-a-header issue (see my last
> post on this thread) was that I can use a FILTER action from a
> smtpd_*_restriction check to select a specialized smtp process
> that is bound to a given IP address.
>
>
> I found, however, that the FILTER actio
> > master.cf smtpd process entry:
> > -o
> > smtpd_data_restrictions=check_sender_access,pcre:/etc/postfix/add_my_header
> >
> > /etc/postfix/add_my_header:
> > /^/ PREPEND X-My-Header: Hello_world
> >
> > Easier than I thought. Now, PLEASE don't take this the wrong way, but
> > > OK, sorry again. I had assumed because you can turn off header checking
>by
> > > using receive_override_options, you could also override (change) them.
> >
> > It is possible to override header_checks by defining a
> > different cleanup_service_name for smtpd, then defining that
> >
email builder:
> some smtpd_*_restrictions checks. It turns out (from my testing, but I can't
> find this in the docs) that you can still use PREPEND to add a header even
> though you're looking at certain envelope data.
ACCESS(5)ACC
On 4/5/2011 12:54 PM, email builder wrote:
master.cf smtpd process entry:
-o
smtpd_data_restrictions=check_sender_access,pcre:/etc/postfix/add_my_header
/etc/postfix/add_my_header:
/^/ PREPEND X-My-Header: Hello_world
Easier than I thought. Now, PLEASE don't take this the wrong
> On 4/4/2011 9:54 PM, email builder wrote:
> >
> > OK, sorry again. I had assumed because you can turn off header checking by
> > using receive_override_options, you could also override (change) them.
>
> It is possible to override header_checks by defining a different
>cleanup_service_na
> On Mon, Apr 04, 2011 at 06:33:20PM -0700, email builder wrote:
> > I am testing a simple header_check that uses PREPEND to add a
> > custom header to messages.
>
> Uh, no, I think it is not simple at all. Is this the same issue
> you're working on? You have spent much time, and gotten muc
Noel Jones:
[ Charset ISO-8859-1 unsupported, converting... ]
> On 4/4/2011 9:54 PM, email builder wrote:
> >
> > OK, sorry again. I had assumed because you can turn off header checking by
> > using receive_override_options, you could also override (change) them.
>
> It is possible to override he
On 4/4/2011 9:54 PM, email builder wrote:
OK, sorry again. I had assumed because you can turn off header checking by
using receive_override_options, you could also override (change) them.
It is possible to override header_checks by defining a
different cleanup_service_name for smtpd, then de
On Mon, Apr 04, 2011 at 06:33:20PM -0700, email builder wrote:
> I am testing a simple header_check that uses PREPEND to add a
> custom header to messages.
Uh, no, I think it is not simple at all. Is this the same issue
you're working on? You have spent much time, and gotten much help,
none of
> > I am testing a simple header_check that uses PREPEND to add a custom
> > header
>to
>
> > messages.
> >
> > 1) I *always* want to add the header, so the detected header in the rule
>doesn't
>
> > matter so much. Does anyone have advice for the best header to detect so
> > I
> >
email builder:
> Hello,
>
> I am testing a simple header_check that uses PREPEND to add a custom header
> to
> messages.
>
> 1) I *always* want to add the header, so the detected header in the rule
> doesn't
> matter so much. Does anyone have advice for the best header to detect so I
> won'
Hello,
I am testing a simple header_check that uses PREPEND to add a custom header to
messages.
1) I *always* want to add the header, so the detected header in the rule
doesn't
matter so much. Does anyone have advice for the best header to detect so I
won't miss any messages? Is /^From:/ th
23 matches
Mail list logo
