Roman Medina-Heigl Hernandez a écrit : > m[snip] > > No, my need is: > 1/ permit_networs + SASL -> no amavisd AND no header check > 2/ incoming mail to my mailboxes -> amavisd but no header check > 3/ incoming mail to be relayed to another MX -> amavisd AND header check! >
that's what I thought initially. this is a bit more difficult. > [snip] >> >> forward_method => 'smtp:[127.0.0.1]:10586', > > You meant 10587, I guess. > indeed. sorry for the infinite loop invitation:) >> (snip] >> >> content_filter=amavisfeed:[127.0.0.1]:10586 >> smtpd_recipient_restrictions = >> ... >> reject_unauth_destination >> check_client_access pcre:/etc/postfix/filter_default.pcre > > In my case, I should use "check_recipient_access", so I could make my > choice based on destination domain. > no, it's not that easy. think of multi-rcpt mail. you can only select ONE filter, even if the message has multiple recipients (the last FILTER statement wins). This is different from transport_maps. In postfix, for multi-recipient filtering, you need to run multiple postfix instances and use transport_maps. >[snip] > > Is there any problem with using FILTER in check_recipient_access? Perhaps > when one only mail has several recipients? If so... any workaround? > if you want a postfix solution, you need to run multiple instances. if that's too much, you can use amavisd-new. it requires some work/thought, but you can make it...
