Hello,

I've been struggling with this for about a week now.
In smtpd_recipient_restrictions I have reject_unverified_recipient.
For recipient address verification I'm using Dovecot's LMTP.
Everything is working as expected when address_verify_negative_cache = yes - unknown recipients are rejected with 550 (NOQUEUE: reject), for known the mail is delivered.

The problem I have is when I set address_verify_negative_cache = no.
It goes like this:

- Sender connects to Postfix
+ Postfix is checking address with Dovecot
+ Dovecot responds (almost instantly) with 550 5.1.1 User doesn't exist; status=undeliverable-but-not-cached - Above + points are repeated as many as address_verify_poll_count times (in my case 5 times, with default it happened 3 times) - Postfix then replies to sender with 450 Recipient address rejected: unverified address: Address verification in progress. - After a while sender is trying to deliver the same e-mail again and the same thing is happening - it is deffered with 450
- This goes on and on and on

It looks like when there is status=undeliverable-but-not-cached Postfix is trying to verify the recipient address address_verify_poll_count times and doesn't understand the Dovecot's 550 reply (status=undeliverable-but-not-cached), after which it should reject sender with 550 (NOQUEUE: reject).

Am I doing something wrong or is this some kind of a bug?
The reason I'm trying to turn off negative cache is due to the catch-all.
For example, user is trying to send an email to mailbox that doesn't exist. The e-mail will be rejected with 550. Then user creates a catch-all for the domain and will send e-mail to the same address. Due to the negative cache it again will be rejected with 550 despite the fact there now is catch-all configured.

This is with Postfix 3.2.3 which I just upgraded from 3.1.6 (on which it was exactly the same). I also have unverified_recipient_reject_code = 550 set.
If something else is needed, like logs or postconf, please let me know.
Don't want to spam mailing list if this is a problem between the chair and the keyboard.

Thank you.

Reply via email to