>> part of my problem is i miss playing `sendmail -bt` adventure to see
>> what the mta is gonna do and why. e.g. from an exim system
>
> You can use "sendmail -bv", which isn't quite the same of course, ...
very different. aside from actually sending the message, one has to
dissect the log to see the result and the mta's thought process is still
not as clearly revealed. though maybe that is my lack of log fu.
> I wasn't suggesting not defining a transport entry, I was merely
> suggesting you should drop the "nexthop".
>
> transport:
> s...@m0.rg.net local
doh.
sorry, in real life i am an L3 routing L2 forwarding guy, and 'nexthop'
was not as obvious to me as it should have been.
that works.
> Though, I do in fact generally prefer per-user rewriting over per-user
> transport tables, so using virtual(5) to rewrite to a local address is
> here better aligned with my view of best practice.
nope, without the explicit transport
virtual:
s...@m0.rg.net spam
sends it off to [psg.com]
randy
_______________________________________________
Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@postfix.org
To unsubscribe send an email to postfix-users-le...@postfix.org
