On Mon, Jul 29, 2024 at 05:45:51PM +1000, Viktor Dukhovni via Postfix-users
wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 29, 2024 at 09:40:45AM +0200, Ralf Hildebrandt via Postfix-users
> wrote:
> > * Viktor Dukhovni via Postfix-users <postfix-users@postfix.org>:
> >
> > > > Is this intentional or a side-effect?
> > >
> > > I'm guessing you have "smtpd_reject_unlisted_sender = yes"?
> >
> > Yes.
> >
> > > In that case, this'd be expected.
> >
> > OK! I was just wondering if I missed a reference somewhere in the
> > docs, since I didn't really see this being mentioned in transport(5)
>
> Well, this isn't really about transport(5), but rather about the sender
> resolving somehow to the "error" transport, which can also, e.g., happen
> for unmatched localparts in virtual alias domains. An address that
> resolves to the error transport, and is not rewritten by virtual
> aliases, or similar,is presumptively invalid (unlisted).
The right way to think about "smtpd_reject_unlisted_sender" is that it
rejects any sender address that would be rejected if it were a recipient
address. One situation in which recipients are rejected is when they're
mapped to the error transport.
--
Viktor.
_______________________________________________
Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@postfix.org
To unsubscribe send an email to postfix-users-le...@postfix.org
