Victor Duchovni:
> On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 12:54:47PM -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
>
> > > I am a bit reluctant at this time to assume that untyped data coming in
> > > that looks like UTF-8, really is UTF-8. Even if the LDAP lookup returns
> > > plausibly useful results, will the UTF-8 envelope su
On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 12:54:47PM -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
> > I am a bit reluctant at this time to assume that untyped data coming in
> > that looks like UTF-8, really is UTF-8. Even if the LDAP lookup returns
> > plausibly useful results, will the UTF-8 envelope survive related
> > processin
Victor Duchovni:
> On Sat, Mar 27, 2010 at 08:53:03PM -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
>
> > Currently, sites that send valid UTF-8 in MAIL/RCPT commands can
> > make meaningful LDAP queries in Postfix. Lots of MTAs are 8-bit
> > clean internally, so this can actually work today.
> >
> > Do we want t
On Sat, Mar 27, 2010 at 08:53:03PM -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
> Currently, sites that send valid UTF-8 in MAIL/RCPT commands can
> make meaningful LDAP queries in Postfix. Lots of MTAs are 8-bit
> clean internally, so this can actually work today.
>
> Do we want to remove this ability from Post
Stefan Foerster:
> As of today, is u...@sch?n.example.com the same user as
> u...@xn--schn-7qa.example.com, as far as e.g. access(5) maps are
> concerned?
No, they are, and have always been, different.
If xn--schn-7qa.example.com is what Postfix receives, then
xn--schn-7qa.example.com is what Pos
* Wietse Venema :
> Currently, sites that send valid UTF-8 in MAIL/RCPT commands can
> make meaningful LDAP queries in Postfix. Lots of MTAs are 8-bit
> clean internally, so this can actually work today.
>
> Do we want to remove this ability from Postfix, or should we add
> a valid_utf_8() routin
Victor Duchovni:
> On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 04:54:00PM -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
>
> > > Don't pass non-ASCII user names to your LDAP table.
> >
> > Hmm. If the Postfix LDAP driver handles only non-ASCII query keys
> > then we should have a smarter response from the mail system.
>
> Agreed. By
On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 04:54:00PM -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
> > Don't pass non-ASCII user names to your LDAP table.
>
> Hmm. If the Postfix LDAP driver handles only non-ASCII query keys
> then we should have a smarter response from the mail system.
Agreed. By the time I read your message, I h
Victor Duchovni:
> On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 06:28:50PM +0100, Matias Surdi wrote:
>
> > The problem is that I'm receiving mails to non existent accounts, or ,
> > with an accented (non ascii) character and instead of rejecting the
> > mail postfix is replying the client with a 451 error, here is th
On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 06:28:50PM +0100, Matias Surdi wrote:
> The problem is that I'm receiving mails to non existent accounts, or ,
> with an accented (non ascii) character and instead of rejecting the
> mail postfix is replying the client with a 451 error, here is the
> session transcript, wit
On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 10:31:50AM -0700, Quanah Gibson-Mount wrote:
> --On Friday, March 26, 2010 6:28 PM +0100 Matias Surdi
> wrote:
>
>
>> Additionaly, on the postfix log I can see:
>>
>> Mar 26 15:44:17 calipso postfix/smtpd[27237]: warning:
>> dict_ldap_lookup: Search error 34: Invalid DN s
--On Friday, March 26, 2010 6:28 PM +0100 Matias Surdi
wrote:
Additionaly, on the postfix log I can see:
Mar 26 15:44:17 calipso postfix/smtpd[27237]: warning:
dict_ldap_lookup: Search error 34: Invalid DN syntax
Looks like dict_ldap_lookup is failing to properly encode the data before
qu
Hi,
I'm running postfix with a ldap vmailbox database for incomming mails.
The problem is that I'm receiving mails to non existent accounts, or ,
with an accented (non ascii) character and instead of rejecting the
mail postfix is replying the client with a 451 error, here is the
session transcrip
13 matches
Mail list logo
