[pfx] Re: Change unknown_address_reject_code on a smarthost to a 5xx reply?

2024-02-15 Thread Matus UHLAR - fantomas via Postfix-users
On 15.02.24 15:27, Simon Hoffmann via Postfix-users wrote: > - it took 4h for the sender to get a notification that the domain was not found Matus UHLAR - fantomas via Postfix-users wrote: this should be configuable by tuning delay_warning_time On 15.02.24 16:10, Simon Hoffmann via

[pfx] Re: Change unknown_address_reject_code on a smarthost to a 5xx reply?

2024-02-15 Thread Simon Hoffmann via Postfix-users
Matus UHLAR - fantomas via Postfix-users wrote: > On 15.02.24 15:27, Simon Hoffmann via Postfix-users wrote: > > I have a dedicated postfix machine that I use as a smarthost for all my > > outgoing > > email from my internal servers. The smarthost even has only ports 465 and > > 587 > >

[pfx] Re: Change unknown_address_reject_code on a smarthost to a 5xx reply?

2024-02-15 Thread Simon Hoffmann via Postfix-users
Jaroslaw Rafa via Postfix-users wrote: > Dnia 15.02.2024 o godz. 15:27:48 Simon Hoffmann via Postfix-users pisze: > > > > - it took 4h for the sender to get a notification that the domain was not > > found > > - after they "corrected" it by sending a second email with the correct > > address,

[pfx] Re: Change unknown_address_reject_code on a smarthost to a 5xx reply?

2024-02-15 Thread Matus UHLAR - fantomas via Postfix-users
On 15.02.24 15:27, Simon Hoffmann via Postfix-users wrote: I have a dedicated postfix machine that I use as a smarthost for all my outgoing email from my internal servers. The smarthost even has only ports 465 and 587 enabled/opened. Recently we had the case that an internal used composer an

[pfx] Re: Change unknown_address_reject_code on a smarthost to a 5xx reply?

2024-02-15 Thread Jaroslaw Rafa via Postfix-users
Dnia 15.02.2024 o godz. 15:27:48 Simon Hoffmann via Postfix-users pisze: > > - it took 4h for the sender to get a notification that the domain was not > found > - after they "corrected" it by sending a second email with the correct > address, they > still got mail delivery delayed