Quoting Patrick Domack :
To make it work the current way, is simple.
I would love for it though, to lookup and see if an mailbox exists
with the delim first, then if it doesn't lookup just the username
part.
Quoting Andrew Ray :
Hi,
It would be nice if the recipient_delimiter confi
To make it work the current way, is simple.
--- a/src/lmtp/commands.c 2013-02-05 18:31:36.0 -0500
+++ b/src/lmtp/commands.c 2014-01-28 18:15:01.011677816 -0500
@@ -387,7 +387,7 @@
return;
domain = strchr(address, '@');
- p = strstr(address, clien
Hi,
It would be nice if the recipient_delimiter configuration option
supported multiple recipient delimiters as Postfix now does.
e.g. now if I set: recipient_delimiter = +- in Postfix, then
test-extens...@sample.com and test+extens...@sample.com are both recognized.
But if I set: recipient_de
On 24 Oct 2013, at 08:54 , LuKreme wrote:
> dovecot unix- n n - - pipe flags=DRhu
> user=user:group argv=/usr/local/libexec/dovecot/deliver -f ${sender} -d
> ${user}@${nexthop} -m ${extension}
I ran into a problem with this line in that the D flag generates an e
Thanks Steffen, with the very slight alteration of removing the -n (which
caused deliver to abort and the message to bounce, oops) from the line I
posted, everything works just fine.
For the archives:
dovecot unix- n n - - pipe flags=DRhu
user=user:group argv=/
On 24 Oct 2013, at 00:37 , Steffen Kaiser wrote:
> This particular step is done in your MTA. So, how do you deliver your
> messages from the MTA into the mail storage of the user? If you want to use
> procmail for system users and Dovecot's LDA/LMTP for virtual users, you need
> to configure
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, 23 Oct 2013, LuKreme wrote:
OK, I've been banging my head on why my procmail setup for virtual users is no
longer working (difficult to test, since enabling it breaks live user's mail).
There are only a few virtual users who have any sort
OK, I've been banging my head on why my procmail setup for virtual users is no
longer working (difficult to test, since enabling it breaks live user's mail).
There are only a few virtual users who have any sort of filters in place anyway
(the heavy procmail users are local, not virtual), and th
On Fri, 27 Sep 2013 15:54:41 -0500 (CDT)
Larry Stone articulated:
> On Fri, 27 Sep 2013, LuKreme wrote:
>
> >> Why use procmail when sieve is so much more powerful?
> >
> > First, I have a lot of procmail recipes over many years. Second,
> > there are quite a few things that sieve can?t do that p
On Fri, 27 Sep 2013 14:39:10 -0600
LuKreme articulated:
>
> On 27 Sep 2013, at 13:45 , Jerry wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 27 Sep 2013 12:01:20 -0600
> > LuKreme articulated:
> >
> >>
> >> On 26 Sep 2013, at 17:36 , Noel Butler
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Certainly does not do that by _default_ in a norm
On Fri, 27 Sep 2013, LuKreme wrote:
Why use procmail when sieve is so much more powerful?
First, I have a lot of procmail recipes over many years. Second, there
are quite a few things that sieve can?t do that procmail does well (for
just one example, calling external programs).
One of the
On 27 Sep 2013, at 13:45 , Jerry wrote:
> On Fri, 27 Sep 2013 12:01:20 -0600
> LuKreme articulated:
>
>>
>> On 26 Sep 2013, at 17:36 , Noel Butler wrote:
>>
>>> Certainly does not do that by _default_ in a normal
>>> mysql/virtuser/maildir setup using lda
>>> when mail arrives for foo+dove.
On Fri, 27 Sep 2013 12:01:20 -0600
LuKreme articulated:
>
> On 26 Sep 2013, at 17:36 , Noel Butler wrote:
>
> > Certainly does not do that by _default_ in a normal
> > mysql/virtuser/maildir setup using lda
> > when mail arrives for foo+dove...@example.com
> > it gets stored in foo's cur/
> >
On 26 Sep 2013, at 17:36 , Noel Butler wrote:
> Certainly does not do that by _default_ in a normal
> mysql/virtuser/maildir setup using lda
> when mail arrives for foo+dove...@example.com
> it gets stored in foo's cur/
> leaving it for the end users mail client to decide what to do with it,
>
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Thu, 26 Sep 2013, LuKreme wrote:
On 26 Sep 2013, at 10:09 , Steffen Kaiser wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, 25 Sep 2013, LuKreme wrote:
Can I enable $recipient_delimiter = ‘+’ for only the virtual sql users?
le
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Thu, 26 Sep 2013, LuKreme wrote:
On 26 Sep 2013, at 15:29 , voy...@sbt.net.au wrote:
should I also enter $recipient_delimiter = ‘+’ in my
/etc/dovecot/dovecot.conf ?
what will it add to this working setup, what am I missing?
Setting it will,
On Thu, 2013-09-26 at 17:24 -0600, LuKreme wrote:
> On 26 Sep 2013, at 15:29 , voy...@sbt.net.au wrote:
> > should I also enter $recipient_delimiter = ‘+’ in my
> > /etc/dovecot/dovecot.conf ?
> >
> > what will it add to this working setup, what am I missing?
>
> Setting it will, as I understan
On 26 Sep 2013, at 15:29 , voy...@sbt.net.au wrote:
> should I also enter $recipient_delimiter = ‘+’ in my
> /etc/dovecot/dovecot.conf ?
>
> what will it add to this working setup, what am I missing?
Setting it will, as I understand it, cause dovecot to automatically file
+extension mail in .e
On Fri, 2013-09-27 at 07:29 +1000, voy...@sbt.net.au wrote:
>
> I have working dovecot 2.1.1 with postfix, only have virtual domains, all
> users in mysql;
>
> '+' delimiter is enabled in postfix, and, works OK
>
> postfix]# grep _delimiter main.cf
> # The recipient_delimiter parameter specifi
>> $recipient_delimiter = ‘+’
ahem, dumb question coming:
//I often read various threads here, and, look at my own setup, with a
view of optimizing or understanding things I should...//
I have working dovecot 2.1.1 with postfix, only have virtual domains, all
users in mysql;
'+' delimiter is en
On 26 Sep 2013, at 10:09 , Steffen Kaiser wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Wed, 25 Sep 2013, LuKreme wrote:
>
>> Can I enable $recipient_delimiter = ‘+’ for only the virtual sql users?
>
> let it blank in the default config, but return a field
> "plugin/recipie
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, 25 Sep 2013, LuKreme wrote:
Can I enable $recipient_delimiter = ‘+’ for only the virtual sql users?
let it blank in the default config, but return a field
"plugin/recipient_delimiter" from SQL.
- --
Steffen Kaiser
-BEGIN PGP SIGNA
Can I enable $recipient_delimiter = ‘+’ for only the virtual sql users?
$ doveconf -n
# 2.2.5: /usr/local/etc/dovecot/dovecot.conf
# OS: FreeBSD 9.1-RELEASE i386
auth_mechanisms = PLAIN LOGIN
disable_plaintext_auth = no
first_valid_uid = 89
login_log_format_elements = user=<%u> %r %m %c
mail_loc
On Tue, 1 Jun 2010 10:09:19 -0400
Phil Howard articulated:
> On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 09:56, Charles Marcus
> wrote:
> > On 2010-06-01 8:39 AM, Phil Howard wrote:
> >> On Fri, May 28, 2010 at 17:30, Charles Marcus wrote:
> >>> Of course it is meant for people, but it is meant to show only the
> >
On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 09:56, Charles Marcus wrote:
> On 2010-06-01 8:39 AM, Phil Howard wrote:
>> On Fri, May 28, 2010 at 17:30, Charles Marcus wrote:
>>> Of course it is meant for people, but it is meant to show only the
>>> bare minimum of what postfix sees as the settings. It is left up to
>>>
On 2010-06-01 8:39 AM, Phil Howard wrote:
> On Fri, May 28, 2010 at 17:30, Charles Marcus wrote:
>> Of course it is meant for people, but it is meant to show only the
>> bare minimum of what postfix sees as the settings. It is left up to
>> you, the sys admin, to be able to interpret the data as p
On Fri, May 28, 2010 at 17:30, Charles Marcus wrote:
> On 2010-05-28 5:01 PM, Phil Howard wrote:
>> On Fri, May 28, 2010 at 16:53, Charles Marcus wrote:
>>> The whole purpose of the -n output is to provide clean, easy to read
>>> *settings* as seen by postfix (as opposed to comments that are meant
On Fri, 28 May 2010 16:26:53 -0400
Charles Marcus articulated:
> This in fact makes customizing settings easy (at least for me). I just
> put all of my settings at the end of the file, so I know that those
> will be the ones used regardless of what is specified above.
That is exactly how I do m
On 2010-05-28 5:01 PM, Phil Howard wrote:
> On Fri, May 28, 2010 at 16:53, Charles Marcus wrote:
>> The whole purpose of the -n output is to provide clean, easy to read
>> *settings* as seen by postfix (as opposed to comments that are meant for
>> people).
> So you are saying that this is not mean
On Fri, May 28, 2010 at 16:53, Charles Marcus wrote:
> On 2010-05-28 4:49 PM, Phil Howard wrote:
>> If postconf -n carried comments along, then it could be used as a
>> config linter ... let it's output replace the original and that will
>> be the one to edit for the next change.
>
> The whole pur
On 2010-05-28 4:49 PM, Phil Howard wrote:
> If postconf -n carried comments along, then it could be used as a
> config linter ... let it's output replace the original and that will
> be the one to edit for the next change.
The whole purpose of the -n output is to provide clean, easy to read
*setti
On Fri, May 28, 2010 at 15:28, Jerry wrote:
> Exactly what type of system are you trying to support? I fail to
> understand why you are constantly changing the base Postfix
> configuration. I add/delete users on a virtually daily basis, however,
> once my basic Postifx configuration was setup, I
On 2010-05-28 2:18 PM, Phil Howard wrote:
> On Fri, May 28, 2010 at 14:06, Charles Marcus wrote:
>> On 2010-05-28 1:00 PM, Phil Howard wrote:
>>> Have you seen any config check tools?
>> Yes - it's called a brain. ;)
> I think you are missing the point.
Not...
> A config check tool would be sif
On Fri, 28 May 2010 14:18:06 -0400
Phil Howard articulated:
> On Fri, May 28, 2010 at 14:06, Charles Marcus
> wrote:
> > On 2010-05-28 1:00 PM, Phil Howard wrote:
> >>> If the problem is protocol related (connections time out, or an
> >>> SMTP server complains about syntax errors etc.) consider
On Fri, May 28, 2010 at 14:06, Charles Marcus wrote:
> On 2010-05-28 1:00 PM, Phil Howard wrote:
>>> If the problem is protocol related (connections time out, or an SMTP
>>> server complains about syntax errors etc.) consider recording a session
>>> with tcpdump, as described in the DEBUG_README d
On 2010-05-28 1:00 PM, Phil Howard wrote:
>> If the problem is protocol related (connections time out, or an SMTP
>> server complains about syntax errors etc.) consider recording a session
>> with tcpdump, as described in the DEBUG_README document.
> Have you seen any config check tools?
Yes - it
On 2010-05-28 11:25 AM, Phil Howard wrote:
> On Fri, May 28, 2010 at 09:55, Charles Marcus wrote:
>> On 2010-05-27 1:42 PM, Phil Howard wrote:
>>> Yup, there was a 2nd setting nearly at the bottom of the file, and
>>> it was different. Thanks for catching that.
>> This is why you *always* go by wh
On Fri, May 28, 2010 at 12:11, Jerry wrote:
> On Fri, 28 May 2010 11:25:17 -0400
> Phil Howard articulated:
>
>
>> My main.cf file has the comments (my own that explains why settings
>> are there, not the default comments). It is the easier to read file.
>> Even then, I was also reading the post
On Fri, 28 May 2010 11:25:17 -0400
Phil Howard articulated:
> My main.cf file has the comments (my own that explains why settings
> are there, not the default comments). It is the easier to read file.
> Even then, I was also reading the postconf -n output and just didn't
> see the subtle differ
On Fri, May 28, 2010 at 09:55, Charles Marcus wrote:
> On 2010-05-27 1:42 PM, Phil Howard wrote:
>> Yup, there was a 2nd setting nearly at the bottom of the file, and
>> it was different. Thanks for catching that.
>
> This is why you *always* go by what output pof postconf -n says, not
> what you
On 2010-05-27 1:42 PM, Phil Howard wrote:
> Yup, there was a 2nd setting nearly at the bottom of the file, and
> it was different. Thanks for catching that.
This is why you *always* go by what output pof postconf -n says, not
what you think you put in main.cf.
You wasted a lot of time (yours and
On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 12:52, Gregory Finch wrote:
>> recipient_delimiter = -
> ^^
> do you mean to have a + here instead?
Yup, there was a 2nd setting nearly at the bottom of the file, and it
was different. Thanks for catching that.
;ve set:
>>>
>>> mailbox_transport = dovecot
>>
>> I have virtual_transport = dovecot
>>
>>> recipient_delimiter = +
>>
>> I have that now (didn't when I initially set up the server assuming it
>> was a default, but later added it
On 2010-05-27 8:27 AM, Phil Howard wrote:
> On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 10:50, Gregory Finch wrote:
>
>> I've never had to touch auth_username_chars to get this to work.
>>
>> In main.cf, I've set:
>>
>> mailbox_transport = dovecot
>
> I have v
On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 16:59, Jerry wrote:
> By the way, Postfix must be properly configured to pass the email
> address to dovecot. I leave that as an exercise to the user. You might
> want to start here thought:
>
> http://wiki.dovecot.org/LDA/Postfix
I already have this:
dovecot un
On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 11:34, Phil Howard wrote:
> On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 16:59, Jerry wrote:
>
>> On or about line 821 in the Dovecot.conf file:
>
> Actually, a lot earlier in my trimmed down version :-)
>
>
>> #auth_username_chars =
>> abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyzABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ0123
On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 16:59, Jerry wrote:
> On or about line 821 in the Dovecot.conf file:
Actually, a lot earlier in my trimmed down version :-)
> #auth_username_chars =
> abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyzABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ01234567890.-_@
>
> If you have not all ready done so, add the "+"
On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 10:50, Gregory Finch wrote:
> I've never had to touch auth_username_chars to get this to work.
>
> In main.cf, I've set:
>
> mailbox_transport = dovecot
I have virtual_transport = dovecot
> recipient_delimiter = +
I have that now (didn&#
On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 16:59, Jerry wrote:
> On or about line 821 in the Dovecot.conf file:
>
> #auth_username_chars =
> abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyzABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ01234567890.-_@
>
> If you have not all ready done so, add the "+" to the end of the list
> and un-comment the line. I bel
ostfix must be properly configured to pass the email
> address to dovecot. I leave that as an exercise to the user. You might
> want to start here thought:
>
> http://wiki.dovecot.org/LDA/Postfix
>
>
I've never had to touch auth_username_chars to get this to work.
On Wed, 26 May 2010 16:20:06 -0400
Phil Howard articulated:
> I have recipient_delimiter = + in main.cf (Postfix). But deliveries
> to dovecot/deliver are still being rejected. It appears that the full
> email is still in the envelope (e.g. phil+how...@example.com which I
> want to be delivered
On 2010-05-26 4:20 PM, Phil Howard wrote:
> I have recipient_delimiter = + in main.cf (Postfix). But deliveries
> to dovecot/deliver are still being rejected. It appears that the full
> email is still in the envelope (e.g. phil+how...@example.com which I
> want to be delivered to p...@example.com
I have recipient_delimiter = + in main.cf (Postfix). But deliveries
to dovecot/deliver are still being rejected. It appears that the full
email is still in the envelope (e.g. phil+how...@example.com which I
want to be delivered to p...@example.com). Is that how it's supposed
to work and Dovecot
53 matches
Mail list logo
