Ok, if all solutions are even to each other I will choose one.
2017-10-27 16:08 GMT+02:00 Matus UHLAR - fantomas :
> On 23.10.17 15:35, Poliman - Serwis wrote:
>
>> Thank you for a lot of answers. Could you tell me how would you resolve
>> the
>> problem?
>>
>
> we already told you how would we r
On 23.10.17 15:35, Poliman - Serwis wrote:
Thank you for a lot of answers. Could you tell me how would you resolve the
problem?
we already told you how would we resolve it.
we gave you a better solutions to choose from, but the choice is up to you.
--
Matus UHLAR - fantomas, uh...@fantomas.sk ;
Thank you for a lot of answers. Could you tell me how would you resolve the
problem? I am not much experienced in mailer daemons. Which is the best
option in my case - developed application send confirmation emails on which
receiver shouldn't answer.
2017-10-23 9:41 GMT+02:00 Matus UHLAR - fantoma
On Oct 23, 2017, at 12:27 AM, Poliman - Serwis wrote:
Ok, I make a mistake, because I didn't say about for what will be use "do not
reply". So - I work in IT company. Developers make different applications and these
applications send mainly confirmation emails, also reminder password emails. T
> On Oct 23, 2017, at 12:27 AM, Poliman - Serwis wrote:
>
> Ok, I make a mistake, because I didn't say about for what will be use "do not
> reply". So - I work in IT company. Developers make different applications and
> these applications send mainly confirmation emails, also reminder passwor
Ok, I make a mistake, because I didn't say about for what will be use "do
not reply". So - I work in IT company. Developers make different
applications and these applications send mainly confirmation emails, also
reminder password emails. These emails should only be send and receiver
could not answ
On 20 Oct 2017, at 11:37 (-0400), Michael Orlitzky wrote:
tl;dr use a real address
That's the bottom line best practice for all use cases. ALL.
If you can't think of a process to handle the asynchronous bounces and
the intentional replies by innocent fools, you should not be sending the
ema
On 20.10.2017 17:37, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
> [...]
> tl;dr use a real address
The reply address is "real", just not monitored. The people I work with
who receive this type of message are smart enough to contact a human, so
I can in good conscience use nore...@somedomain.tld as a generic sender
On 10/20/2017 09:57 AM, Ralph Seichter wrote:
>
> Depending on the use case, discarding email can be as valid a method as
> rejecting email. Messages sent by automation- or monitoring-services
> (Jenkins, Icinga) come to mind. If somebody chooses to reply to these
> machine-generated notifications
On 20.10.2017 14:43, /dev/rob0 wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 11:12:17AM +0200, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
>
> > I recommend using real, existent address and check its content once
> > upon a time. You don't want to get blocked (see points 2. and 4.)
>
> Absolutely. This is better than the DI
On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 03:29:02PM +0200, Poliman - Serwis wrote:
> Do you have maybe other better options? I am open for all nice
> suggestions. :)
I already said what I think is best, so no. But maybe we don't fully
know why you're wanting the "no reply" address?
> 2017-10-20 14:43 GMT+02:00
On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 11:12:17AM +0200,
Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
> I recommend using real, existent address and check its content once
> upon a time. You don't want to get blocked (see points 2. and 4.)
2017-10-20 14:43 GMT+02:00 /dev/rob0 :
Absolutely. This is better than the DISCA
What are you really trying to accomplish? What is the problem you are
trying to solve?
Original Message
> Date: Friday, October 20, 2017 15:29:02 +0200
> From: Poliman - Serwis
> To: Postfix users
> Subject: Re: disable receiving for particular email
>
create "do not reply" email account. The
> > > simpliest way is create an email account and disable receiving.
>
> As was suggested upthread, the simplest way is NOT to create the
> account.
>
> > > Which option in Postfix permit disable receiving for parti
ed upthread, the simplest way is NOT to create the
account.
> > Which option in Postfix permit disable receiving for particular
> > email?
>
> you can disable receiving mail for such account using
> check_recipient_access
Some references of interest:
http://www
On 20.10.17 08:00, Poliman - Serwis wrote:
Hi all. I would like to create "do not reply" email account. The simpliest
way is create an email account and disable receiving. Which option in
Postfix permit disable receiving for particular email?
you can disable receiving mail for su
On 20.10.2017 08:00, Poliman - Serwis wrote:
> I would like to create "do not reply" email account.
If by that you mean throwing away incoming email silently instead of
generating rejection errors, a polite way to do it is using recipient
restrictions.
smtpd_recipient_restrictions = ... check_
Fri, 20 Oct 2017 08:00:35 +0200 skrev Poliman - Serwis :
> Hi all. I would like to create "do not reply" email account. The simpliest
> way is create an email account and disable receiving. Which option in
> Postfix permit disable receiving for particular email?
>
Why
Hi all. I would like to create "do not reply" email account. The simpliest
way is create an email account and disable receiving. Which option in
Postfix permit disable receiving for particular email?
--
*Pozdrawiam / Best Regards*
*Piotr Bracha*
19 matches
Mail list logo
