Am 09.07.2010 um 19:46 schrieb Victor Duchovni: > On Fri, Jul 09, 2010 at 07:25:45PM +0200, Philipp Leusmann wrote: > >> Jul 9 19:15:25 s15277780 postfix/smtpd[22232]: dict_tcp_lookup: send: get >> be...@xxx.de >> Jul 9 19:15:25 s15277780 postfix/smtpd[22232]: dict_tcp_lookup: recv: 200 >> DEFER%20User%20over%20quota >> Jul 9 19:15:25 s15277780 postfix/smtpd[22232]: dict_tcp_lookup: found: >> DEFER User over quota >> Jul 9 19:15:25 s15277780 postfix/smtpd[22232]: check_table_result: >> tcp:localhost:1337 DEFER User over quota be...@xxx.de > > So far, so good. > >> Jul 9 19:15:25 s15277780 postfix/smtpd[22232]: >>> START Recipient address >> RESTRICTIONS <<< > > It should never get here, the code in check_table_result() handles strings > starting with "DEFER <SPACE or TAB> ..." directly, without delegating > to the "generic_checks" code. > > Either your Postfix source is modified, miscompiled, the binaries are > corrupted, or CPU is mal-functioning. > >> Jul 9 19:15:25 s15277780 postfix/smtpd[22232]: generic_checks: name=DEFER >> Jul 9 19:15:25 s15277780 postfix/smtpd[22232]: NOQUEUE: reject: RCPT from >> mta-2.ms.rz.RWTH-Aachen.DE[134.130.7.73]: 450 4.3.2 <be...@xxx.de>: >> Recipient address rejected: Try again later; >> from=<philipp.leusm...@rwth-aachen.de> to=<be...@xxx.de> proto=ESMTP >> helo=<mta-2.ms.rz.rwth-aachen.de> >> Jul 9 19:15:25 s15277780 postfix/smtpd[22232]: warning: restriction `User' >> after `defer' is ignored >> Jul 9 19:15:25 s15277780 postfix/smtpd[22232]: generic_checks: name=DEFER >> status=2 >> Jul 9 19:15:25 s15277780 postfix/smtpd[22232]: generic_checks: >> name=check_recipient_access status=2 > >> >> postconf -n shows this: >> >> smtpd_recipient_restrictions = >> permit_mynetworks, >> reject_unauth_destination, >> reject_unlisted_recipient, >> check_recipient_access tcp:localhost:1337 > > OK, this is an access(5) check as expected, and goes through > check_table_result(), which implements "DEFER <text>". So your system > is not behaving as the original Postfix would on a working machine > running correctly compiled code. > >> BTW: I am running Postfix 2.5.5-1.1 on Debian Etch (?. I never can >> remember. The latest one :) ) > > The relevant code has not changed in quite some time.
It would be nice, if somebody else, also running a Debian Lenny (it's lenny, not etch) system could verify this behavior. Anybody here? I will also reinstall postfix and try again. Philipp
