Sabahattin Gucukoglu:
> On 24 Apr 2010, at 13:57, Wietse Venema wrote:
> Sabahattin Gucukoglu:
> >> I'm setting up Postfix 2.6, speculatively, reading through the
> >> documentation and building my configuration. It appears that the
> >> scenario I want is somewhere between virtual and local deliveries.
> >>
> >> What I want to do: .forward support, /etc/aliases support, detail
> >> address (user-foo) support.
> >>
> >> What I do not want: mail being delivered or accepted to bin,
> >> daemon, and other nonsense.
> >>
> >> The machine is only serving me and my services, all implemented
> >> as aliases. My alias is not equal to my username, which itself
> >> doesn't get mail and doesn't want it, thank you very much.
> >> Therefore, everything is an alias, there will never be, and I
> >> don't want, deliveries for non-alias or non-.forward-style deliveries
> >> referenced through an alias.
> >>
> >> Can somebody explain if there is some right way to do this? Am
> >> I even thinking along the right lines? Perhaps I should implement
> >> this another way. Right now I would be using local(8) and access
> >
> > I recommend that you make a distinction between "inside" and
> > "outside" views.
> >
> > - For the "inside" view, alias all system accounts (bin, daemon,
> > etc) to the "primary" user. You don't want to throw away mail that
> > is related to activity by local processes.
> >
> > - For the "outside" view, set local_recipient_maps to a table that
> > lists only accounts that are to supposed to receive mail from
> > outside the machine. There is no legitimate reason to send mail to
> > (bin, daemon, etc) from outside.
> >
> > /etc/postfix/main.cf:
> > local_recipient_maps = hash:/etc/postfix/local
> >
> > /etc/postfix/local:
> > # bare username, not u...@domain
> > foo whatever
> > bar whatever
> > ...
> >
> > Where "whatever" can be any non-empty string.
> >
> > http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#local_recipient_maps
> > http://www.postfix.org/DATABASE_README.html#lists
>
> Okay, this looks great, but I have clearly missed a beat here,
> that check is being done in smtpd. Does this mean that
> recipient_delimiter is checked in smtpd as well as in the delivery
> agent itself? That's how LOCAL_RECIPIENT_README looks to me.
> Because if it does, I'm made. :-) I'm clearly spoiled, coming
> from sendmail.
If something looks up an address in some table, then it will look
up both the extended and unextended version. Otherwise, either
some mail would be lost, or some barrier would be skipped.
Wietse
