mouss:
> Victor Duchovni a ?crit :
> > On Mon, Jan 05, 2009 at 03:31:52AM +0100, mouss wrote:
> >
> >> Victor Duchovni a ?crit :
> >>> [snip]
> >>> Why per-recipient transport lookups? Often better to rewrite to a domain
> >>> where the entire domain is handled by lmtp(8).
> >>>
> >> is there a be
On Mon, Jan 05, 2009 at 03:49:55AM +0100, mouss wrote:
> Victor Duchovni a ?crit :
> > On Mon, Jan 05, 2009 at 03:31:52AM +0100, mouss wrote:
> >
> >> Victor Duchovni a ?crit :
> >>> [snip]
> >>> Why per-recipient transport lookups? Often better to rewrite to a domain
> >>> where the entire domai
Victor Duchovni a écrit :
> On Mon, Jan 05, 2009 at 03:31:52AM +0100, mouss wrote:
>
>> Victor Duchovni a ?crit :
>>> [snip]
>>> Why per-recipient transport lookups? Often better to rewrite to a domain
>>> where the entire domain is handled by lmtp(8).
>>>
>> is there a benefit in avoiding per rec
On Mon, Jan 05, 2009 at 03:31:52AM +0100, mouss wrote:
> Victor Duchovni a ?crit :
> > [snip]
> > Why per-recipient transport lookups? Often better to rewrite to a domain
> > where the entire domain is handled by lmtp(8).
> >
>
> is there a benefit in avoiding per recipient transports?
Simplici
Victor Duchovni a écrit :
> [snip]
> Why per-recipient transport lookups? Often better to rewrite to a domain
> where the entire domain is handled by lmtp(8).
>
is there a benefit in avoiding per recipient transports? or said
otherwise: is there a way to tell postfix to only lookup domains?
>>
On Mon, Jan 05, 2009 at 12:42:10AM +0100, Patrick Ben Koetter wrote:
> * Victor Duchovni :
>
> ...
>
> > > Sending them off to a LMTP server is a transport map job:
> > >
> > > recipi...@example.com lmtp:localhost
> >
> > The correct syntax (if the default port is OK) is:
> >
> > rec
* Victor Duchovni :
...
> > Sending them off to a LMTP server is a transport map job:
> >
> > recipi...@example.com lmtp:localhost
>
> The correct syntax (if the default port is OK) is:
>
> recipi...@example.com lmtp:inet:localhost
Maybe its just me, but I had not looked for t
On Sun, Jan 04, 2009 at 09:31:42PM +0100, Patrick Ben Koetter wrote:
> Maps in $relay_recipient_maps are evaluated as lists - only the LHS is
> examined to determine if a recipient is listed and therefore a valid
> recipient.
Only used in smtpd(8) where no rewriting takes place, just address
vali
Maps in $relay_recipient_maps are evaluated as lists - only the LHS is
examined to determine if a recipient is listed and therefore a valid
recipient.
Does the same apply for local_recipient_maps, virtual_alias_maps and
virtual_mailbox_maps when Postfix tries to determine if a given recipient is
a
