On 2012.04.09 23.32, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
On Mon, Apr 09, 2012 at 10:21:05PM -0400, [email protected] wrote:
Given my understanding of address classes, it seemed that in order to use
virtual_alias_maps, those related domains would need to be listed in
virtual_alias_domains.
This assumption is incorrect. All recipients, regardless of address
class are subject to virtual(5) rewriting.
so the relationship between virtual_alias_maps/virtual_alias_domains is
not quite the same as the relationship between
virtual_mailbox_maps/virtual_mailbox_domains or
relay_recipients/relay_domains?
meaning- iiuc, in order for virtual_milbox_maps to be used for a given
domain, the domain needs to be listed in virtual_mailbox_domains, and
the same concept for the relay domain class. is this right?
whereas with virtual_alias_maps, this is always used, regardless of if a
given domain is listed in virtual_alias_domains - and, putting the given
domain in virtual_alias_domains serves not to allow virtual_alias_maps
to work, but rather to preclude the given domain from being in some
other address class [i.e. to isolate the domain as *only* a virtual
alias domain]?
-ben
