On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 12:23:17PM -0500, postadmin wrote:
> Hoping to clarify if remote transport mappings can be restricted.
This sentence employes unusual terminology. It is unlikely to be
understood here. Please explain yourself more clearly, avoiding
dense jargon. Nobody on this list will know what "restricting
remote transport mappings" means.
> ... it appears that master_service_disable allows for specific
> listeners to be disabled.
As does commenting out entries in master.cf, but the ability to
easily turn them back on when needed makes "master_service_disable"
useful in some cases.
> However the type of listener/service specific to transport mappings "587
> submission" is unclear.
What is "transport mapping 587 submission". Do you mean the optional
(commented out in the stock master.cf file from postfix.org)
submission service entry in master.cf?
> Essentially transport mappings are currently bypassing the unix spamc.
No idea what that means.
> If possible please clarify if transport mappings can be restricted or
> "forwarded" to the unix spamc.
Or this. You'll to explain your goals more clearly. Most importantly
explain what you're really trying to achieve, rather than difficulties
with a particular, possibly less than ideal approach to getting
there.
--
Viktor.
