On Tuesday, May 26, 2009 at 17:22 CEST,
Per olof Ljungmark wrote:
[...]
> One last thing I could not find in the manual, maybe I'm blind as usual,
> but does postconf -b|-c|-e require a postfix reload?
"postconf -e" only edits main.cf for you, so you will have to reload
Postfix for all cha
Barney Desmond wrote:
> 2009/5/26 Per olof Ljungmark :
>> May 26 08:13:41 terrapin postfix/smtpd[79633]: NOQUEUE: reject: RCPT
>> from sender.server[1.2.3.4]: 550 5.1.1 : Recipient
>> address rejected: User unknown in relay recipient table;
>> from= to= proto=ESMTP
>> helo=
>>
>> May 26 08:23:06
On 26-May-2009, at 02:51, Per olof Ljungmark wrote:
But I think we're wandering away from the original question anyhow?
And
if it is wrong that Postfix responds with "user unknown" when the
directory is unavailable, what SHOULD it be? "Don't know"?
You keep saying that it is Postfix that is r
Per olof Ljungmark:
> Wietse Venema wrote:
> > Per olof Ljungmark:
> >> In our view Postfix should not respond with 5xx when it cannot contact
> >> the LDAP servers. This is not a fault with Postfix at all, it is us that
> >
> > What evidence exists that POSTFIX contacts the LDAP server?
>
> May
2009/5/26 Per olof Ljungmark :
> May 26 08:13:41 terrapin postfix/smtpd[79633]: NOQUEUE: reject: RCPT
> from sender.server[1.2.3.4]: 550 5.1.1 : Recipient
> address rejected: User unknown in relay recipient table;
> from= to= proto=ESMTP
> helo=
>
> May 26 08:23:06 terrapin postfix/smtpd[79805]: NO
Wietse Venema wrote:
> Per olof Ljungmark:
>> In our view Postfix should not respond with 5xx when it cannot contact
>> the LDAP servers. This is not a fault with Postfix at all, it is us that
>
> What evidence exists that POSTFIX contacts the LDAP server?
May 26 12:53:59 thewheel slapd[52495]: c
Charles Marcus wrote:
> On 5/26/2009, Per olof Ljungmark (p...@bsdlabs.com) wrote:
>> And if it is wrong that Postfix responds with "user unknown" when the
>> directory is unavailable, what SHOULD it be? "Don't know"?
>
> You're not listening.
>
> Postfix is not 'responding'... it simply relies o
Per olof Ljungmark:
> In our view Postfix should not respond with 5xx when it cannot contact
> the LDAP servers. This is not a fault with Postfix at all, it is us that
What evidence exists that POSTFIX contacts the LDAP server?
What is the Postfix LDAP query for this table?
Wietse
On 5/26/2009, Per olof Ljungmark (p...@bsdlabs.com) wrote:
> And if it is wrong that Postfix responds with "user unknown" when the
> directory is unavailable, what SHOULD it be? "Don't know"?
You're not listening.
Postfix is not 'responding'... it simply relies on the SYSTEM LIBRARY
function to p
Magnus Bäck wrote:
> On Monday, May 25, 2009 at 23:13 CEST,
> Per olof Ljungmark wrote:
>
>> Magnus Bäck wrote:
>>
May 20 09:59:24 postfix/smtpd[77250]: NOQUEUE: reject:
RCPT from [IP.HERE]: 550 5.1.1 : Recipient
address rejected: User unknown; from= to=
proto=ESMTP helo
On Monday, May 25, 2009 at 23:13 CEST,
Per olof Ljungmark wrote:
> Magnus Bäck wrote:
>
> > > May 20 09:59:24 postfix/smtpd[77250]: NOQUEUE: reject:
> > > RCPT from [IP.HERE]: 550 5.1.1 : Recipient
> > > address rejected: User unknown; from= to=
> > > proto=ESMTP helo=
> >
> > "postconf -n"
Magnus Bäck wrote:
On Monday, May 25, 2009 at 22:35 CEST,
Per olof Ljungmark wrote:
Wietse Venema wrote:
Sorry, that is a well-known bug in YOUR SYSTEM LIBRARY.
Postfix uses the SYSTEM LIBRARY function getpwnam() to look up the
user name, and when LDAP is busted, YOUR SYSTEM LIBRARY ge
Per olof Ljungmark:
[ Charset ISO-8859-1 unsupported, converting... ]
> Wietse Venema wrote:
> > Per olof Ljungmark:
> >> Our MX's use a LDAP directory to lookup valid addresses. Now, if this
> >> directory for some reason becomes temporarily unavailable, postfix will
> >> return a 5xx error for
On Monday, May 25, 2009 at 22:35 CEST,
Per olof Ljungmark wrote:
> Wietse Venema wrote:
>
> > Sorry, that is a well-known bug in YOUR SYSTEM LIBRARY.
> >
> > Postfix uses the SYSTEM LIBRARY function getpwnam() to look up the
> > user name, and when LDAP is busted, YOUR SYSTEM LIBRARY getpwna
Wietse Venema wrote:
Per olof Ljungmark:
Our MX's use a LDAP directory to lookup valid addresses. Now, if this
directory for some reason becomes temporarily unavailable, postfix will
return a 5xx error for ALL incoming messages.
Sorry, that is a well-known bug in YOUR SYSTEM LIBRARY.
Postfix
Per olof Ljungmark:
> Our MX's use a LDAP directory to lookup valid addresses. Now, if this
> directory for some reason becomes temporarily unavailable, postfix will
> return a 5xx error for ALL incoming messages.
Sorry, that is a well-known bug in YOUR SYSTEM LIBRARY.
Postfix uses the SYSTEM L
Per olof Ljungmark a écrit :
> Magnus Bäck wrote:
>> On Monday, May 25, 2009 at 21:49 CEST,
>> Per olof Ljungmark wrote:
>>
>>> I wonder if there is a builtin feature to make Postfix switch return
>>> codes on address lookup errors, i.e. in our case if the LDAP directory
>>> is temporarily un
Per olof Ljungmark a écrit :
> Hi,
>
> I wonder if there is a builtin feature to make Postfix switch return
> codes on address lookup errors, i.e. in our case if the LDAP directory
> is temporarily unavailable?
>
if it is temporarily unavailable, then the answer is a temporary error.
what else?
Magnus Bäck wrote:
On Monday, May 25, 2009 at 21:49 CEST,
Per olof Ljungmark wrote:
I wonder if there is a builtin feature to make Postfix switch return
codes on address lookup errors, i.e. in our case if the LDAP directory
is temporarily unavailable?
No. To what should the rejection co
On Monday, May 25, 2009 at 21:49 CEST,
Per olof Ljungmark wrote:
> I wonder if there is a builtin feature to make Postfix switch return
> codes on address lookup errors, i.e. in our case if the LDAP directory
> is temporarily unavailable?
No. To what should the rejection code change?
> If
Hi,
I wonder if there is a builtin feature to make Postfix switch return
codes on address lookup errors, i.e. in our case if the LDAP directory
is temporarily unavailable?
If not I guess we could use a script and a temporary bounce.cf.
Ideas welcome.
Thanks,
--
per
21 matches
Mail list logo
