On Fri, Jul 03, 2009 at 03:14:00PM +0200, G?bor L?n?rt wrote:
> First I had the hope that there is some chance to make postfix work like
> this, but yes, it's an MTA, not a filter/proxy. Just I was confused with
> some "before queue" things I had heared before, so I thought it's possible
> somehow to "rape" it to work this way even with some external patches or who
> knows ... And I was curious about the opinions of people here in general.
>
> > tried it, but you may be interested in ASSP, I believe it fits the
> > definition of an SMTP proxy:
> > http://assp.sourceforge.net/
>
> Hmm, thanks a lot, I will check it out!
Feel free, but my advice is that your requirements are misguided.
Postfix can be a non-queueing proxy in front of another MTA by the
way, if you make sure that the ESMTP feature-set of the back-end
MTA are is the same as that advertised by Postfix.
I've done this to add TLS support for non-TLS capabable MTAs without
introducing an intermediate queue.
http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#smtpd_proxy_filter
Still not a good idea in general.
--
Viktor.
Disclaimer: off-list followups get on-list replies or get ignored.
Please do not ignore the "Reply-To" header.
To unsubscribe from the postfix-users list, visit
http://www.postfix.org/lists.html or click the link below:
<mailto:majord...@postfix.org?body=unsubscribe%20postfix-users>
If my response solves your problem, the best way to thank me is to not
send an "it worked, thanks" follow-up. If you must respond, please put
"It worked, thanks" in the "Subject" so I can delete these quickly.
