On Sunday, June 07, 2009 at 10:28 CEST,
Mike Robinson wrote:
[...]
> I'd be interested in knowing what's wrong with reusing the transport
> maps in the way that I have?
What would happen if you'd add some other domain to your transport
table? Say, hotmail.com in order to resolve a delivery
On Sunday 07 June 2009 09:14:24 mouss wrote:
>
> maybe be because you forgot to put that domain under relay_domains.
>
Ah, right, yes. Thanks!
>
> you don't have permit_mynetworks here. and btw, the order of your checks
> is dubious.
>
> smtpd_recipient_restrictions =
> reject_non_fqdn_r
Mike Robinson a écrit :
> Hi Magnus,
>
> Thanks for replying.
>
>> If that is the case, why isn't mydestination empty? You have emptied
>> local_recipient_maps, but this means that all addresses are accepted
>> (and then possibly bounced, which is bad).
>>
>
> Because I was getting messages in
Hi Magnus,
Thanks for replying.
>
> If that is the case, why isn't mydestination empty? You have emptied
> local_recipient_maps, but this means that all addresses are accepted
> (and then possibly bounced, which is bad).
>
Because I was getting messages in the logs like this, and
/var/spool/cl
On Saturday, June 06, 2009 at 16:24 CEST,
Mike Robinson wrote:
> We have a server on the internet which provides spam filtering and a
> couple of other bits and bobs.
>
> Spam filtering is by postgrey, amavis, clamav and spamassassin. There
> are no local recipients,
If that is the case, w
Hi there,
We have a server on the internet which provides spam filtering and a couple of
other bits and bobs.
Spam filtering is by postgrey, amavis, clamav and spamassassin. There are no
local recipients, and all mail is forwarded to the mailbox servers (via
transport maps) on our various int
