Re: smtpd_sender_restriction

2016-12-29 Thread John Fawcett
On 12/29/2016 11:13 AM, Martin Skjöldebrand wrote: > Den 2016-12-29 kl. 10:45, skrev Dominic Raferd: > >> Two possibilities occur to me - (a) the email is not 'really' from >> i...@rabattgatan.com, maybe this is the envelope sender or just the >> display name? or (b) if your mailserver is relaying

Re: smtpd_sender_restriction

2016-12-29 Thread Dominic Raferd
On 29 December 2016 at 10:13, Martin Skjöldebrand wrote: > > I post the headers of the mail here in case more eyes can see what I'm > not seeing. > > Return-Path: > Delivered-To: mar...@skjoldebrand.org > Received: from localhost (mail.skjoldebrand.org [127.0.0.1]) > by mail.skjoldebrand.

Re: smtpd_sender_restriction

2016-12-29 Thread Martin Skjöldebrand
Den 2016-12-29 kl. 10:45, skrev Dominic Raferd: > Two possibilities occur to me - (a) the email is not 'really' from > i...@rabattgatan.com, maybe this is the envelope sender or just the > display name? or (b) if your mailserver is relaying on incoming emails > to another final destination mailbox

Re: smtpd_sender_restriction

2016-12-29 Thread Dominic Raferd
On 29 December 2016 at 08:08, Martin Skjöldebrand wrote: > Den 2016-12-29 kl. 09:05, skrev Martin Skjöldebrand: >> Can you show evidence, i.e. the log file entries of an email passing >>> through your system from the arrival to the delivery, which shows that >>> the map was not taken into account?

Re: smtpd_sender_restriction

2016-12-29 Thread Martin Skjöldebrand
Den 2016-12-29 kl. 09:05, skrev Martin Skjöldebrand: > Can you show evidence, i.e. the log file entries of an email passing >> through your system from the arrival to the delivery, which shows that >> the map was not taken into account? > > This is a bit weird. I can see other mails in list above

Re: smtpd_sender_restriction

2016-12-28 Thread Martin Skjöldebrand
Den 2016-12-28 kl. 21:40, skrev Noel Jones: > On 12/28/2016 1:03 PM, Martin Skjöldebrand wrote: >> The output indicates it will discard the rubbish. I must've remembered >> incorrectly or something. I'll spend some time later to look at the >> logs. Thanks all who commented. > > While it's very sa

Re: smtpd_sender_restriction

2016-12-28 Thread Noel Jones
On 12/28/2016 1:03 PM, Martin Skjöldebrand wrote: > The output indicates it will discard the rubbish. I must've remembered > incorrectly or something. I'll spend some time later to look at the > logs. Thanks all who commented. While it's very satisfying to DISCARD the rubbish, it's often counterpr

Re: smtpd_sender_restriction

2016-12-28 Thread Martin Skjöldebrand
Den 2016-12-28 kl. 16:56, skrev John Fawcett: > you can test your map with: > > postmap -q rabattgatan.com hash:/etc/postfix/sender_access > > Can you show evidence, i.e. the log file entries of an email passing > through your system from the arrival to the delivery, which shows that > the map w

Re: smtpd_sender_restriction

2016-12-28 Thread Martin Skjöldebrand
Yes I did, sorry I didn't mention it. /martin s ⁣ Skickat från BlueMail ​ Den 28 dec. 2016 11:42, kI 11:42, Dominic Raferd skrev: >On 28 December 2016 at 09:06, Martin Skjöldebrand > wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I was under the impression that >> >> smtpd_sender_restrictions=check_sender_access >> has

Re: smtpd_sender_restriction

2016-12-28 Thread Dominic Raferd
On 28 December 2016 at 09:06, Martin Skjöldebrand wrote: > Hi, > > I was under the impression that > > smtpd_sender_restrictions=check_sender_access > hash:/etc/postfix/sender_access > > would take a list of domain and either reject or discard the message on > reaching the server, based on the con

smtpd_sender_restriction

2016-12-28 Thread Martin Skjöldebrand
Hi, I was under the impression that smtpd_sender_restrictions=check_sender_access hash:/etc/postfix/sender_access would take a list of domain and either reject or discard the message on reaching the server, based on the content of the file /etc/postfix/sender_access. Maybe I am totally confused