On Mon, Jul 01, 2002 at 03:56:20PM -0500, Phil Howard wrote:

> Jul 1 15:55:12 rack4 postfix/qmgr[6337]: 72025F5: from=<philipal.net>, size=508, nrcpt=1 (queue active)
> Jul 1 15:55:12 rack4 postfix/smtpd[6364]: disconnect from vega.ipal.net[209.102.192.64]
> Jul 1 15:55:12 rack4 postfix/local[6367]: 72025F5: to=<ka9wgnrack4.intur.net>, relay=local, delay=0, status=bounced (unknown user: "ka9wgn")

At least we now know that "local" is involved.
Wasn't the whole idea NOT to use "local" but some other LDA, like
"virtual"?

-- 
Ralf Hildebrandt (Im Auftrag des Referat V A)   Ralf.Hildebrandtcharite.de
Charite Campus Virchow-Klinikum                 Tel.  +49 (0)30-450 570-155
Referat V A - Kommunikationsnetze -             Fax.  +49 (0)30-450 570-916
I wish you'd tell me what kind of systems they're using instead,
because HP can't be doing much worse than Sun "would you like the
compiler or internet options with that" Microsystems, or Silicon "hey
be glad the support-contract number isn't a 1-900" Graphics. Then
there's Digital "It sucks in 64 bits, you can't suck in 64 bits
anywhere else" Equipment Corp (Did we mention it's 64 bits?). 
-
To unsubscribe, send mail to majordomopostfix.org with content
(not subject): unsubscribe postfix-users

• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]