Chris Babcock wrote:
> On Sat, 08 Aug 2009 11:24:55 +0200
> Per Jessen wrote:
>
>> I'd like to treat the original and the bcc copy slightly different
>> based on their content. Basically:
>>
>> a) original: if headerX matches condition1, override transport to
>> divert email.
>>
>> b) bcc-cop
On Sat, 08 Aug 2009 11:24:55 +0200
Per Jessen wrote:
> I'd like to treat the original and the bcc copy slightly different
> based on their content. Basically:
>
> a) original: if headerX matches condition1, override transport to
> divert email.
>
> b) bcc-copy: if headerX matches condition2, o
I'd like to treat the original and the bcc copy slightly different based
on their content. Basically:
a) original: if headerX matches condition1, override transport to divert
email.
b) bcc-copy: if headerX matches condition2, override transport to
discard email.
Anything that matches condition2
Clunk Werclick schrieb:
> Hello,
>
> I have been toying with the best way to produce a report of 'allowed'
> messages that have made it all the way through my Postfix. I love the
> Postfix logs, they give such detail on failures and refusals and parsing
> this is quite straightforward.
>
> The e
Hello,
I have been toying with the best way to produce a report of 'allowed'
messages that have made it all the way through my Postfix. I love the
Postfix logs, they give such detail on failures and refusals and parsing
this is quite straightforward.
The entertainment commences when I try to fig
On Fri, 07 Aug 2009 21:28:58 -0400
Jorey Bump wrote:
> > I understand that wildcard certs can be
> > considered a security risk, but is the risk really much greater if
> > it includes a longer hostname?
>
> *.com
Here's a better example. I might be willing to have my server say,
"Yes, that'
