Folks,
it seems to me that there has been some misunderstanding of Jim's setup
and situation.
> Clearly, you are *NOT* doing recipient verification, or
> myotherserver.com would not be rejecting it. Never accept mail which
> cannot be delivered.
What he describes is that the final destination
Miles Fidelman:
> Wietse Venema wrote:
> > Recipient verification does not expand a local alias (imagine what
> > would have to be done to verify with addresses in .forward files,
> > or in a mail distribution list).
> >
> >
> Maybe I'm dense, but what would be the problem with verifying address
Wietse Venema wrote:
Recipient verification does not expand a local alias (imagine what
would have to be done to verify with addresses in .forward files,
or in a mail distribution list).
Maybe I'm dense, but what would be the problem with verifying addresses
in .forward files?
For list man
Jim Lang:
> But if mycli...@otherserver.com can for whatever reason not be
> delivered, otherserver.com does what it is supposed to do and
> rejects the mail during the smtp connection, which causes postfix
> to send out a non-delivery report to vic...@randomdomain.com --
>
This page (http://www.postfix.org/ADDRESS_VERIFICATION_README.html)
looks like it describes part of your problem. Could be the solution
Regards
tobi
I had had a lot of troubles with verification database. For example...
new customer is added to SMTP relay, changed MX record to point my
Jaroslaw Grzabel schrieb:
> Jim Lang pisze:
>> John Peach wrote:
>>> On Mon, 16 Nov 2009 13:07:05 -0700
>>> Jim Lang wrote:
>>>
>>>
John Peach wrote:
> On Mon, 16 Nov 2009 13:00:26 -0700
> Jim Lang wrote:
>
>
>> Wietse Venema wrote:
>>
Jim Lang pisze:
John Peach wrote:
On Mon, 16 Nov 2009 13:07:05 -0700
Jim Lang wrote:
John Peach wrote:
On Mon, 16 Nov 2009 13:00:26 -0700
Jim Lang wrote:
Wietse Venema wrote:
Jim Lang:
OK here is the scenario.
Spammer sends mail to: u...@mycl
John Peach wrote:
On Mon, 16 Nov 2009 13:07:05 -0700
Jim Lang wrote:
John Peach wrote:
On Mon, 16 Nov 2009 13:00:26 -0700
Jim Lang wrote:
Wietse Venema wrote:
Jim Lang:
OK here is the scenario.
Spammer sends mail to: u...@myclients
Stan Hoeppner wrote:
Jim Lang put forth on 11/16/2009 2:00 PM:
Wietse Venema wrote:
Jim Lang:
OK here is the scenario.
Spammer sends mail to: u...@myclientsdomain.com from forged address
vic...@randomdomain.com
If u...@myclientsdomain.com is delivered locally, not a problem
On Mon, 16 Nov 2009 13:07:05 -0700
Jim Lang wrote:
> John Peach wrote:
> > On Mon, 16 Nov 2009 13:00:26 -0700
> > Jim Lang wrote:
> >
> >
> >> Wietse Venema wrote:
> >>
> >>> Jim Lang:
> >>>
> >>>
> OK here is the scenario.
>
> Spammer sends mail to: u...@mycl
On Mon, Nov 16, 2009 at 12:53:14PM -0700, Jim Lang wrote:
> OK here is the scenario.
> Spammer sends mail to: u...@myclientsdomain.com from forged address
> vic...@randomdomain.com
>
> If u...@myclientsdomain.com is delivered locally, not a problem, if the
> address is invalid, postix rejects
John Peach wrote:
On Mon, 16 Nov 2009 13:00:26 -0700
Jim Lang wrote:
Wietse Venema wrote:
Jim Lang:
OK here is the scenario.
Spammer sends mail to: u...@myclientsdomain.com from forged
address vic...@randomdomain.com
If u...@myclientsdomain.com is delivered locally, no
On Mon, 16 Nov 2009 13:00:26 -0700
Jim Lang wrote:
> Wietse Venema wrote:
> > Jim Lang:
> >
> >> OK here is the scenario.
> >>
> >> Spammer sends mail to: u...@myclientsdomain.com from forged
> >> address vic...@randomdomain.com
> >>
> >> If u...@myclientsdomain.com is delivered locally, no
Wietse Venema wrote:
Jim Lang:
OK here is the scenario.
Spammer sends mail to: u...@myclientsdomain.com from forged address
vic...@randomdomain.com
If u...@myclientsdomain.com is delivered locally, not a problem, if the
address is invalid, postix rejects the mail during the smtp connec
Jim Lang:
> OK here is the scenario.
>
> Spammer sends mail to: u...@myclientsdomain.com from forged address
> vic...@randomdomain.com
>
> If u...@myclientsdomain.com is delivered locally, not a problem, if the
> address is invalid, postix rejects the mail during the smtp connection.
>
> Bu
15 matches
Mail list logo