There are actually three alias routers: virtual_aliases_nostar virtual_aliases system_aliases Those routers, plus the drop_solo_alias are all from the DA configuration.
The router with "unseen" is the "nostar" router. I confess I don't understand exim redirected routing well enough to know precisely why that line is there. However, from Googling virtual_aliases_nostar, I found an explanation of the router some time back on the DA forum. The answer given was somewhat involved. If I understood correctly, the purpose is to handle the situation where you wish to store a message both in the pop file and the alias file, and the "unseen" is meant to avoid duplicate delivery. I have a hunch my problem is that I don't have my acl confguration correct for the redirected routing. Phil Pennock wrote: > On 2010-07-10 at 17:19 -0700, Phillip Carroll wrote: > >> If I understand exim correctly check_local_user looks up $local_part as >> a local user. Therefore, I added $local_part to the fail message in the >> localuser transport to see what is being looked up. (With the resuilt >> shown above) Given the fact that mercury is only an alias and not the >> actual aliased user, that explains the failure of check_local_user. >> Then I don't understand why the data assignments in the virtual_aliases >> routers are not passing the actual user through to the localuser router. >> > > Why are you using "unseen" on the Router which does the aliasing? That > means that the aliased address is being generated as a secondary routing > recipient and the main address continues through. > > -Phil > -- ## List details at http://lists.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users ## Exim details at http://www.exim.org/ ## Please use the Wiki with this list - http://wiki.exim.org/
