Hi, I have a postfix 2.3.3 system being used for redirection purposes
during a migration from sendmail to postfix.
let call this system postfix1 (192.168.10.10) , the new postfix system
is postfix2 (192.168.10.20) and the old system is sendmail1
(192.168.10.30)

I am using a combination of /etc/postfix/virtual and
/etc/postfix/transport  on postfix1 to accomplish this:

Situation: an email is received by postfix1, destined for
[EMAIL PROTECTED] , sales is a group list and the members are
[EMAIL PROTECTED] and [EMAIL PROTECTED]
erick lives in postfix2 while tom lives in sendmail1.

postfix1 consults its virtual table and finds:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]            [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
so, postfix1 then tries to deliver to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and
[EMAIL PROTECTED] BUT since the transport table is consulted then postfix1
finds:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]     smtp:[postfix2]:25
[EMAIL PROTECTED]      smtp:[sendmail1]:25

And correctly delivers the emails to both servers. This is all good.
However when the user (using ms outlook express) sees the email, the
email has "undisclosed recipients" as the To:

Here are the headers:

#Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
#Received: from postfix1.oj.gob.pa ([192.168.10.10])
#       by sendmail1.oj.gob.pa (8.10.2/8.10.2) with ESMTP id mAQKhEq28642
#       for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Wed, 26 Nov 2008 15:43:14 -0500
#Received: from erick (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
#       by postfix1.oj.gob.pa (Postfix) with SMTP id 3098F77003D
#       for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Wed, 26 Nov 2008 23:49:57 -0500 (EST)
#Subject: Testing
#Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
#Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2008 23:49:57 -0500 (EST)
#From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
#To: undisclosed-recipients:;

Both for sendmail and for postfix recipients, then TO: arrived
"undisclosed recipients". Is this normal postfix behavior? How can i
"fix" this so [EMAIL PROTECTED] is correctly displayed in the TO field?

BTW if you have a better way to do what i am doing, please share!!!! ;)

thanks.


--
------------------------------------------------------------
Erick Perez

Reply via email to