On 13/07/2024 12:50, Francis Augusto Medeiros-Logeay via Postfix-users
wrote:
Thanks a lot John and Peter!
In fact this is a family server, so it’s kinda important for us to not
miss emails. And it happened once that mails were not delivered
because of typos.
I was a bit worried about nas
> On 13 Jul 2024, at 11:14, John Fawcett via Postfix-users
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
> On 13/07/2024 06:54, Francis Augusto Medeiros-Logeay via Postfix-users wrote:
>> Hi everyone,
>>
>> Thanks a lot for your feedback. I learned a lot. So I’ll forget the whole
>> thing.
>>
>> I have a last ques
On 13/07/24 16:54, Francis Augusto Medeiros-Logeay via Postfix-users wrote:
Thanks a lot for your feedback. I learned a lot. So I’ll forget the
whole thing.
I have a last question, though: are there disadvantages of using a
catchall compared to not using it, just letting messages bounce when t
On 13/07/2024 06:54, Francis Augusto Medeiros-Logeay via Postfix-users
wrote:
Hi everyone,
Thanks a lot for your feedback. I learned a lot. So I’ll forget the
whole thing.
I have a last question, though: are there disadvantages of using a
catchall compared to not using it, just letting mes
Hi everyone,Thanks a lot for your feedback. I learned a lot. So I’ll forget the whole thing. I have a last question, though: are there disadvantages of using a catchall compared to not using it, just letting messages bounce when the address does not exist instead?I notice that I don’t get spam with
one point was badly worded below, the following is better:
If you accepted both valid and invalid recipients your reject would be
for both recipients. (I implied the reject went to the receipient which
is nonsense).
On 12/07/2024 16:59, John Fawcett via Postfix-users wrote:
On 12/07/2024 1
* John Fawcett via Postfix-users:
> On 12/07/2024 15:30, Ralph Seichter via Postfix-users wrote:
>
> > "My advice true, forget this!" (Alvina)
>
> I agree with the advice but have some doubts about the milter
> solution.
I don't dare call it a solution, nor was it meant as such. Like I wrote,
thi
On 12/07/2024 15:30, Ralph Seichter via Postfix-users wrote:
I can imagine a custom milter which stores message data, rejects the
original SMTP delivery attempt after the end of the DATA phase, and
later re-injects the captured data in some fashion (not necessarily
using SMTP), but this way
On 2024-07-12 at 09:30:33 UTC-0400 (Fri, 12 Jul 2024 15:30:33 +0200)
Ralph Seichter via Postfix-users
is rumored to have said:
I can imagine a custom milter which stores message data, rejects the
original SMTP delivery attempt after the end of the DATA phase, and
later re-injects the captured d
On 2024-07-12 at 04:55:08 UTC-0400 (Fri, 12 Jul 2024 08:55:08 +)
Francis Augusto Medeiros-Logeay via Postfix-users
is rumored to have said:
On 11 Jul 2024, at 20:22, Bill Cole via Postfix-users
wrote:
On 2024-07-11 at 02:42:26 UTC-0400 (Thu, 11 Jul 2024 06:42:26 +)
Francis Augusto M
* Francis Augusto Medeiros-Logeay via Postfix-users:
> I want that mail sent to users who do not have a valid address (like
> when they are not on ldap) to bounce back, like it happens by default,
> but I’d also like these mail to be delivered to an specific mailbox.
>
> As you said, if I use catc
Dnia 12.07.2024 o godz. 08:55:08 Francis Augusto Medeiros-Logeay via
Postfix-users pisze:
> I want that mail sent to users who do not have a valid address (like
> when they are not on ldap) to bounce back, like it happens by
> default, but I'd also like these mail to be delivered to an specific
>
On 12/07/2024 07:17, Francis Augusto Medeiros-Logeay via Postfix-users
wrote:
On 11 Jul 2024, at 20:22, Bill Cole via Postfix-users
wrote:
On 2024-07-11 at 02:42:26 UTC-0400 (Thu, 11 Jul 2024 06:42:26 +)
Francis Augusto Medeiros-Logeay via Postfix-users
is rumored to have said:
On 11 Jul 2024, at 20:22, Bill Cole via Postfix-users
wrote:
On 2024-07-11 at 02:42:26 UTC-0400 (Thu, 11 Jul 2024 06:42:26 +)
Francis Augusto Medeiros-Logeay via Postfix-users
is rumored to have said:
Hi,
I was wondering - is it possible to bounce e-mails for non-existent
addresses wh
>
>> On 11 Jul 2024, at 20:22, Bill Cole via Postfix-users
>> wrote:
>>
>
> On 2024-07-11 at 02:42:26 UTC-0400 (Thu, 11 Jul 2024 06:42:26 +)
> Francis Augusto Medeiros-Logeay via Postfix-users
> is rumored to have said:
>
> Hi,
>
> I was wondering - is it possible to bounce e-mails fo
On 2024-07-11 at 02:42:26 UTC-0400 (Thu, 11 Jul 2024 06:42:26 +)
Francis Augusto Medeiros-Logeay via Postfix-users
is rumored to have said:
Hi,
I was wondering - is it possible to bounce e-mails for non-existent
addresses when using a catchall?
Define your terms clearly and you willhave
On Thu, Jul 11, 2024 at 06:42:26AM +, Francis Augusto Medeiros-Logeay via
Postfix-users wrote:
> I was wondering - is it possible to bounce e-mails for non-existent
> addresses when using a catchall?
This question makes no sense. If you want to reject mail to (all or
most) addresses that do
17 matches
Mail list logo
