On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 11:48:56PM +0100, A. Schulze wrote:
> I assume the changes behavior is dovecot/pigeonhole now using the advertised
> "CHUNKING" extension.
Yes.
> Reason: "Data command rejected: Multi-recipient bounce" while there is
> clearly only one recipient.
>
> Mar 11 23:27:54 dili postfix-smo/submission/smtpd[22427]: 44JCRG5tYPzCqt2:
> reject: BDAT from signing-milter.org[84.200.211.109]: 550 5.5.3 <DATA>:
> Data command rejected: Multi-recipient bounce; from=<> to=<m...@example.org>
> proto=ESMTP helo=<signing-milter.org>
> since years I have "smtpd_data_restrictions =
> reject_multi_recipient_bounce,reject_unauth_pipelining,permit"
> Must that be adjusted with 3.4.x?
Your no-BDAT work-around is sufficient until the code is updated
along lines below:
--
Viktor.
--- a/src/smtpd/smtpd.h
+++ b/src/smtpd/smtpd.h
@@ -259,6 +259,10 @@ extern void smtpd_state_reset(SMTPD_STATE *);
#define SMTPD_CMD_XFORWARD "XFORWARD"
#define SMTPD_CMD_UNKNOWN "UNKNOWN"
+#define SMTPD_IN_BODY(state) \
+ (strcmp((state)->where, SMTPD_CMD_DATA) == 0 || \
+ strcmp((state)->where, SMTPD_CMD_BDAT) == 0)
+
/*
* Representation of unknown and non-existent client information. Throughout
* Postfix, we use the "unknown" string value for unknown client information
--- a/src/smtpd/smtpd_check.c
+++ b/src/smtpd/smtpd_check.c
@@ -4582,8 +4582,8 @@ static int generic_checks(SMTPD_STATE *state, ARGV
*restrictions,
if (state->recipient && *state->recipient)
status = check_recipient_rcpt_maps(state, state->recipient);
} else if (strcasecmp(name, REJECT_MUL_RCPT_BOUNCE) == 0) {
- if (state->sender && *state->sender == 0 && state->rcpt_count
- > (strcmp(state->where, SMTPD_CMD_DATA) ? 0 : 1))
+ if (state->sender && *state->sender == 0
+ && state->rcpt_count > (SMTPD_IN_BODY(state) ? 1 : 0))
status = smtpd_check_reject(state, MAIL_ERROR_POLICY,
var_mul_rcpt_code, "5.5.3",
"<%s>: %s rejected: Multi-recipient bounce",
