Hi Victor,
Thanks for your response,
> If your policy service says "FILTER ..." it is setting a
> content_filter that preempts transport table routing for *all*
> recipients.
Ok, thanks for clarifying this. It was one of questions we did but
wasn't resolved (from my previous mail):
It is like smtp(8) is ignoring what's declared on transport_maps
because it already has an order to use the transport indicated
by the FILTER +transp2 (point 2). Is it right or it shouldn't
happen?
> > I'm confused about this statement because it is not what's happening
> > right now and I have shown an example that demonstrates it :-?
>
> Yes, you're confused. No, you don't have a counter-example.
:-)
> > But if I make valvula to report "FILTER transp2:", then postfix2, in
> the> diagram "postfix1 -> filter -> postfix2" completely ignores
> > transport_maps:
>
> Exactly as it should, it is up to "transp2" to re-inject the mail
> back into Postfix (bypassing the policy service with its FILTER
> replies).
Ok, so Victor, going back to the initial question, assuming that:
1) We need that "FILTER transp2:", through the delegation protocol, to
setup different outgoing IP (it seems there's no other way to do this),
2) And we need some way to discard a single recipient (by destination
domain or destination local-part@) in a multi-recipient message,
Is there any way to do it without having to write an external
content-filter (as described in [1])?
Can it be done reusing postfix components?
...or there's no other option :-( ?
Thanks for your time,
Best Regards,
[1] http://www.postfix.org/FILTER_README.html
