|
Neohapsis is currently accepting applications for employment. For more information, please visit our website www.neohapsis.com or email hr@neohapsis.com |
Subject: Re: unknown mail transport (more info)
From: Admin Mailing Lists (mlist
intergrafix.net)Date: Tue Apr 11 2000 - 13:46:34 CDT
- Next message: Wietse Venema: "Re: Problem with owner-* aliases not being used"
- Previous message: Nick Holloway: "Re: Problem with owner-* aliases not being used"
- In reply to: Wietse Venema: "Re: unknown mail transport (more info)"
- Next in thread: Bennett Todd: "Legal mailbox names? (was Re: unknown mail transport ...)"
- Reply: Admin Mailing Lists: "Re: unknown mail transport (more info)"
- Reply: Bennett Todd: "Legal mailbox names? (was Re: unknown mail transport ...)"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
i have no idea what mail reader the client uses. i'm surprised they
haven't called being that no mail for this username is being delivered.
I blame customer service for even taking this as a username.
If I was you i wouldn't do anything. if you changed it to _ then what
happens if a user is called t_lut. it's not very likely, but it's
possible.
I wonder if periods are even allowed, per RFC standards.
seems if you're using hashed spools, if you have a level of 2 or more, one
of the directories would have to be called '.' which we both know can't
happen..so i would think it goes against some RFC.
-Tony
.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-.
Anthony J. Biacco Network Administrator/Engineer
admin
intergrafix.net Intergrafix Internet Services
"Dream as if you'll live forever, live as if you'll die today"
http://cygnus.ncohafmuta.com http://www.intergrafix.net
.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-._.-.
On Tue, 11 Apr 2000, Wietse Venema wrote:
> Admin Mailing Lists:
> >
> > On Tue, 11 Apr 2000, Wietse Venema wrote:
> >
> > > > Apr 11 12:10:28 athena postfix/local[2406]: panic: dir_forest: invalid
> > > > pathname: t.lut
> > >
> > > 1 - What is the reason for not including this essential information
> > > in the previous emails on this problem?
> > >
> >
> > i dont remember seeing it there in the log. it's not generated by local
> > -v?
>
> panic/fatal/warning messages are always logged. Perhaps you have
> a syslog configuration that has upper both and lower thresholds.
>
> > > 2 - What algorithm does the mail reading software user for usernames
> > > with a . in them?
> >
> > not sure i follow this question. if i send a message from pine to
> > t.lut
intergrafix.net the previous given errors show up in the log and no
> > mail for that username gets delivered.
>
> How would the mail reading program find the mailbox?
>
> I could change postfix so that it uses a _ when the name contains
> a . but I wonder what filename the mail reading program would use.
>
> Wietse
>
>
> Wietse
>
>
- Next message: Wietse Venema: "Re: Problem with owner-* aliases not being used"
- Previous message: Nick Holloway: "Re: Problem with owner-* aliases not being used"
- In reply to: Wietse Venema: "Re: unknown mail transport (more info)"
- Next in thread: Bennett Todd: "Legal mailbox names? (was Re: unknown mail transport ...)"
- Reply: Admin Mailing Lists: "Re: unknown mail transport (more info)"
- Reply: Bennett Todd: "Legal mailbox names? (was Re: unknown mail transport ...)"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]