Re: {Spam?} Re: Plus (+ Address Extensions) addressing

2012-06-29 Thread James B. Byrne
On Thu, June 28, 2012 15:21, Noel Jones wrote: > On 6/28/2012 10:54 AM, James B. Byrne wrote: > >> And in virtual_aliases_maps those entries in virtual_mailbox_maps >> need be mapped to actual delivery points that cyrus-imapd >> recognizes: > > Actual user->mailbox mapping is done is cyrus. Postf

Re: {Spam?} Re: Plus (+ Address Extensions) addressing

2012-06-28 Thread Noel Jones
On 6/28/2012 10:54 AM, James B. Byrne wrote: > Given that on the final delivery host we treat ALL of our domains, > real and virtual, as virtual for the purposes of email; > > And the final delivery host is NOT listed as MX for any domain; > > And we are using cyrus-imap; > > And we take the vi

Re: Plus (+ Address Extensions) addressing

2012-06-28 Thread James B. Byrne
On Thu, June 28, 2012 14:48, Noel Jones wrote: > > One example configuration does not exclude other possible > configurations. > The difficulty I face is excluding those which either do not work or are not particularly robust. I am not conversant with the inner working of either Postfix or Cyrus

Re: Plus (+ Address Extensions) addressing

2012-06-28 Thread Noel Jones
On 6/28/2012 10:18 AM, James B. Byrne wrote: > > On Thu, June 28, 2012 13:41, Noel Jones wrote: > >> cyrus_destination_recipient_limit=1 means deliver a maximum of one >> recipient to each "cyrus" transport defined in master.cf, which >> pipes to the cyrus "deliver" program; there may be multiple

Re: {Spam?} Re: Plus (+ Address Extensions) addressing

2012-06-28 Thread James B. Byrne
On Thu, June 28, 2012 13:11, Noel Jones wrote: > > virtual_mailbox_domains / virtual_mailbox_maps is for the typical > "hosted" domain with recipients that may or may not be actual unix > users and the possibility of many separate domains coexisting on the > same server. Delivery to the mailstor

Re: Plus (+ Address Extensions) addressing

2012-06-28 Thread James B. Byrne
On Thu, June 28, 2012 13:41, Noel Jones wrote: > cyrus_destination_recipient_limit=1 means deliver a maximum of one > recipient to each "cyrus" transport defined in master.cf, which > pipes to the cyrus "deliver" program; there may be multiple > processes running in parallel. > > Apparently some

Re: Plus (+ Address Extensions) addressing

2012-06-28 Thread Noel Jones
On 6/28/2012 9:14 AM, James B. Byrne wrote: > > On Thu, June 28, 2012 11:05, k...@rice.edu wrote: > >> >> One item to keep in mind is that if you use the local(8) for mailbox >> delivery, you cannot use the Cyrus single-instance store functionality >> where a message sent to multiple recipients i

Re: Plus (+ Address Extensions) addressing

2012-06-28 Thread Noel Jones
On 6/28/2012 5:36 AM, James B. Byrne wrote: > Thank you for your assistance. I am not concerned that the advice I > receive is wrong. My limited experience with Postfix simply makes it > difficult for me to grasp the entire meaning and implications of what > I am told. > > Perhaps this would be

Re: Plus (+ Address Extensions) addressing

2012-06-28 Thread James B. Byrne
On Thu, June 28, 2012 11:05, k...@rice.edu wrote: > > One item to keep in mind is that if you use the local(8) for mailbox > delivery, you cannot use the Cyrus single-instance store functionality > where a message sent to multiple recipients is only stored once on > the filesystem. The local agen

Re: Plus (+ Address Extensions) addressing

2012-06-28 Thread k...@rice.edu
On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 09:58:08AM -0500, /dev/rob0 wrote: > On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 07:00:18AM -0400, James B. Byrne wrote: > > On Thu, June 28, 2012 06:36, James B. Byrne wrote: > > > Perhaps this would be clearer to me if you would be so kind as > > > to give me the canonical use cases for virtu

Re: Plus (+ Address Extensions) addressing

2012-06-28 Thread /dev/rob0
On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 07:00:18AM -0400, James B. Byrne wrote: > On Thu, June 28, 2012 06:36, James B. Byrne wrote: > > Perhaps this would be clearer to me if you would be so kind as > > to give me the canonical use cases for virtual_aliases and for > > virtual_domains > > This should read "virtu

Re: Plus (+ Address Extensions) addressing

2012-06-28 Thread James B. Byrne
On Thu, June 28, 2012 06:36, James B. Byrne wrote: > Perhaps this would be clearer to me if you would be so kind as to give > me the canonical use cases for virtual_aliases and for virtual_domains This should read "virtual_mailbox_domains" > insofar as Postfix considers them. Why is the latter

Re: Plus (+ Address Extensions) addressing

2012-06-28 Thread James B. Byrne
Thank you for your assistance. I am not concerned that the advice I receive is wrong. My limited experience with Postfix simply makes it difficult for me to grasp the entire meaning and implications of what I am told. Perhaps this would be clearer to me if you would be so kind as to give me the

Re: Plus (+ Address Extensions) addressing

2012-06-27 Thread Noel Jones
On 6/27/2012 11:31 AM, James B. Byrne wrote: > > On Wed, June 27, 2012 14:28, Noel Jones wrote: >> On 6/27/2012 8:47 AM, James B. Byrne wrote: >> >>> The background is this. We are moving from a Sendmail/Cyrus-imap >>> based system of many years to a Postfix/Cyrus-imap based email >>> system. >>>

Re: Plus (+ Address Extensions) addressing

2012-06-27 Thread James B. Byrne
On Wed, June 27, 2012 14:28, Noel Jones wrote: > On 6/27/2012 8:47 AM, James B. Byrne wrote: > >> The background is this. We are moving from a Sendmail/Cyrus-imap >> based system of many years to a Postfix/Cyrus-imap based email >> system. >> During the transitions the existing Sendmail/Cyrus-im

Re: Plus (+ Address Extensions) addressing

2012-06-27 Thread Noel Jones
On 6/27/2012 8:47 AM, James B. Byrne wrote: > The background is this. We are moving from a Sendmail/Cyrus-imap > based system of many years to a Postfix/Cyrus-imap based email system. > During the transitions the existing Sendmail/Cyrus-imap service > naturally remains active. > You describe a

Re: Plus (+ Address Extensions) addressing

2012-06-27 Thread James B. Byrne
First, I thank everyone who has been kind enough to provide me with guidance. I appreciate it very much. Second, I wish to recap my present situation so that any remaining misunderstandings on my part are exposed to your observation and comments. The background is this. We are moving from a Sen

Re: Plus (+ Address Extensions) addressing

2012-06-26 Thread Noel Jones
On 6/26/2012 12:48 PM, James B. Byrne wrote: > My point of confusion at the moment is the relationship between > /etc/postfix/virtual and /etc/aliases (or in our case > /etc/postfix/aliases.main). http://www.postfix.org/ADDRESS_REWRITING_README.html virtual_alias_maps apply to *all* addresses,

Re: Plus (+ Address Extensions) addressing

2012-06-26 Thread James B. Byrne
On Mon, June 25, 2012 18:47, Bill Cole wrote: > On 25 Jun 2012, at 14:03, James B. Byrne wrote: > > [...] >> The virtual_aliases map contains this: >> >> @example.com someuser >> > > So that any address in example.com is entirely replaced with the local > address so

Re: Plus (+ Address Extensions) addressing

2012-06-26 Thread Noel Jones
On 6/26/2012 8:35 AM, James B. Byrne wrote: > I now have this working properly for a test account. It seems to me > now that many of my difficulties stem from trying to map Sendmail > techniques to Postfix. > > I am now considering the relationship between /etc/postfix/virtual and > /etc/postfix/

Plus (+ Address Extensions) addressing

2012-06-26 Thread James B. Byrne
I now have this working properly for a test account. It seems to me now that many of my difficulties stem from trying to map Sendmail techniques to Postfix. I am now considering the relationship between /etc/postfix/virtual and /etc/postfix/relay_domains. To deliver email to a local mailbox wher

Re: Plus (+ Address Extensions) addressing

2012-06-25 Thread Bill Cole
On 25 Jun 2012, at 14:03, James B. Byrne wrote: [...] The virtual_aliases map contains this: @example.com someuser So that any address in example.com is entirely replaced with the local address someuser, no matter what the local part of the original address

Plus (+ Address Extensions) addressing

2012-06-25 Thread James B. Byrne
I am trying to get this messaged delivered to cyrus-imapd via lmtp as shown: echo -e "Subject: Test Delivery\n\n A Test Message $(date)\n." | sendmail -vvv someuser+deliv...@example.com These imap directories exist: /var/spool/imap/s/someuser/example/delivery Both user.example and user.example