On 2012-03-10 09:17:25, /dev/rob0 wrote: > Wietse has already answered about the problem you made, but I have > some things to add. First, WHY are you doing this? Why all domains > and why only info@? This does not make much sense.
I was seeing if there was a way to avoid having to maintain a list of domains in multiple places. info@ is a business requirement, and you are right that I could add abuse@, and postmaster@ as suggested below. > Same as "virtual_alias_domains = static:yes". Yes, I actually tried that. > > virtual_alias_maps = pcre:${config_directory}/virtual_alias_maps > > > > /^info@.*/ i...@example.com > > > > however this fails with: > > > > Mar 10 09:14:26 regatta postfix/cleanup[1448]: 881C16B: > > message-id=<> > > Mar 10 09:14:26 regatta postfix/qmgr[1441]: 881C16B: > > from=<al...@lifeintegrity.com>, size=199, nrcpt=1 (queue active) > > Mar 10 09:14:26 regatta postfix/error[1449]: 881C16B: > > to=<al...@example.com>, orig_to=<i...@example.org>, relay=none, > > delay=9.4, delays=9.4/0.01/0/0.01, dsn=5.0.0, status=bounced > > (User unknown in virtual alias table) > > This means that example.com is in virtual_alias_domains, but > i...@example.com does not resolve in virtual_alias_maps to an address > which is NOT in virtual_alias_domains. Hmm... ok. > > Mar 10 09:14:26 regatta postfix/bounce[1450]: 881C16B: sender > > non-delivery notification: 8039170 > > Mar 10 09:14:26 regatta postfix/qmgr[1441]: 881C16B: removed > > > > I think this because postfix is not able to validate the > > sender, al...@lifeintegrity.com, as a valid virtual user. > > Not so. The sender address has nothing to do with it. Wietse's response earlier lead me to test the following virtual_alias_domains: if !/example\.com/ /.*/ anything endif Obviously this mean the forwarding domain is not virtual, which is fine, and it seems to do the trick: Mar 11 01:05:05 regatta postfix/qmgr[26524]: EAF366B: from=<al...@lifeintegrity.com>, size=199, nrcpt=1 (queue active) Mar 11 01:05:05 regatta postfix/smtp[28438]: EAF366B: to=<i...@example.com>, orig_to=<i...@example.org>, relay=..., delay=14, delays=14/0.01/0.13/0.26, dsn=2.0.0, status=sent (250 2.0.0 OK 1331427905 b10si9623054icv.83) Mar 11 01:05:05 regatta postfix/qmgr[26524]: EAF366B: removed > So why not do this? What is wrong with bullet biting? That is, in > fact, the best possible answer I can see, from my very limited > perspective of understanding the real problem and goal. It means I can deploy postfix and not worry about updating its configuration as the list of domains change. Thanks for your insights. /Allan -- Allan Wind Life Integrity, LLC <http://lifeintegrity.com>