Noel Jones put forth on 8/25/2010 4:24 PM: > FILTER is a poor choice for per-recipient filtering. FILTER is a > per-message action, with only one FILTER action per message (if there > are multiple FILTER actions triggered, only the last will be used). If > there are multiple recipients for a message, they all get the same > FILTER action; the last one triggered.
I used a bad example then. I used check_recipient_access simply because I knew the proper format of the table. What I actually want is a wildcard, for all users, but I didn't want to type an example with incorrect syntax. I don't know how to specify all users in the table. I thought it was just * but I wasn't sure. Anyway, you keyed on the wrong thing. > The proper solution for per-recipient content filtering is to use > multiple postfix instances. This isn't what I'm wanting. What I want is something like: check_client_access hash:/etc/postfix/sa /etc/postfix/sa * filter smtp:localhost:783 if that is the correct syntax and correct TCP port of spamd. I know I need another smtpd listener on a port other than 25 to accept the mail back from spamd. Basically all I really need to know is the proper syntax and table type I need to use in main.cf, and the proper -o strings for the 2nd smtpd listener. I can assign the TCP port manually in both spamd and master.cf to match them up. That's the one thing I do know how to do. > Easy choices for single-recipient filtering: > - use whatever filtering dovecot can provide > - use amavisd-new for everyone; define (not Stan) as > @bypass_spam_checks_maps and @spam_lovers_maps. This would probably be > low enough resource usage to be run as a smtpd_proxy_filter. Is it not possible to setup this loop with strictly postfix and spamd? Adding in amavisd-new, as I already mentioned, seems to be simply adding unneeded complexity. Thanks for the feedback. Your next reply should get me 99% of the way home. -- Stan
