Charles Marcus wrote: > On 5/26/2009, Per olof Ljungmark (p...@bsdlabs.com) wrote: >> And if it is wrong that Postfix responds with "user unknown" when the >> directory is unavailable, what SHOULD it be? "Don't know"? > > You're not listening. > > Postfix is not 'responding'... it simply relies on the SYSTEM LIBRARY > function to perform user lookups. As Wietse said, this is an OS (system > library) problem. > >> In our view Postfix should not respond with 5xx when it cannot >> contact the LDAP servers. > > It doesn't. Again, it is YOUR OS that is responding with 'user unknown'. > > Postfix doesn't talk directly to the LDAP server - again, as Wietse > already told you, it relies on the OS SYSTEM LIBRARIES to handle that. > > Please don't shoot the messenger (postfix in this case) because you > don't like the message.
You're not listening. "This is not a fault with Postfix at all, it is us that want to avoid Postfix sending a permanent error when in fact the problem is transient but Postfix cannot possibly know that unless we explicitly tells it." is what I wrote. Does that show you we blame Postfix? And, if we did not like Postfix we would not be using it. I'm not into blaming or shooting anyone but apparently there are others who are. Perhaps it's time to re-phrase the question, I'll try this: Can one change the bounce code/message temporarily on-the-fly? postconf -b? Cheers, -- per
