|
Neohapsis is currently accepting applications for employment. For more information, please visit our website www.neohapsis.com or email hr@neohapsis.com |
Subject: Re: Is this possible with postfix?
From: Parkhaev Vladimir (vladimir
teleglobe.ca)Date: Sun Mar 05 2000 - 12:34:55 CST
- Next message: Wietse Venema: "Re: SCSI, U2W in particular?, and poor performance..."
- Previous message: Justin Robertson: "Re: SCSI, U2W in particular?, and poor performance..."
- In reply to: Wietse Venema: "Re: Is this possible with postfix?"
- Next in thread: Wietse Venema: "Re: Is this possible with postfix?"
- Reply: Parkhaev Vladimir: "Re: Is this possible with postfix?"
- Reply: Wietse Venema: "Re: Is this possible with postfix?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On Sun, 5 Mar 2000, Wietse Venema wrote:
> Parkhaev Vladimir:
> > > > Mar 5 14:11:57 myhost postfix/smtp[566]: 262C0330A7: to=<postmaster
mydomain.com>, relay=none, delay=0, status=bounced (Name service error for domain postmaster: Host not found)
> > > >
> > > > smtp treats user name as domain name. Any ideas why?
> > >
> > > This was fixed with Postfix 19991231 patch mumble.
> >
> > Hmmm, I am running postfix-19991231-pl4....
>
> My copy of postfix-19991231-pl04 qmgr/qmgr_message.c says:
>
> 529 if ((at = strrchr(STR(reply.recipient), '
')) == 0
> 530 || resolve_local(at + 1)) {
> 531 #if 0
> 532 vstring_strcpy(reply.nexthop, STR(reply.recipient));
> 533 (void) split_at_right(STR(reply.nexthop), '
');
> 534 #endif
> 535 #if 0
> 536 if (*var_rcpt_delim)
> 537 (void) split_addr(STR(reply.nexthop), *var_rcpt_delim);
> 538 #endif
>
> It therefore no longer sets the next-hop hostname equal to username.
>
> wietse
>
You right, I had pl2 on this box. I upgrdaded three other to pl4 but not this
one. Upgrading to pl4 did the trick for 'Name service error for domain
postmaster' error. However,
transport.regexp:
/./!/mydomain\.com$/ smtp:[111.222.33.44] works fine but
/./!/[
.]mydomain\.com$/ smtp:[111.222.33.44]
sends _everything_ to 111.222.33.44.
Any ideas why? Thanks.
------------------------------------------------------------------
Vladimir Parkhaev, System Administrator, Teleglobe Canada
vladimir
Teleglobe.CA, 514-868-7823(Ph), 514-868-8357(Fax)
1441 Carrie-Derick, Montreal, Que, Canada H3C 4S9
- Next message: Wietse Venema: "Re: SCSI, U2W in particular?, and poor performance..."
- Previous message: Justin Robertson: "Re: SCSI, U2W in particular?, and poor performance..."
- In reply to: Wietse Venema: "Re: Is this possible with postfix?"
- Next in thread: Wietse Venema: "Re: Is this possible with postfix?"
- Reply: Parkhaev Vladimir: "Re: Is this possible with postfix?"
- Reply: Wietse Venema: "Re: Is this possible with postfix?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]