RE: sender_dependent_default_transport_maps and recipient routing

2010-11-29 Thread Stirling, Scott
> These are not "keywords", they are transport names. Transports are > defined in master.cf. Ahh, so the names are conventional, configurable. Flexible configurability is a theme with Postfix. > The "smtp" transport is for other people's domains, the "relay" > transport is for your domains that a

Re: sender_dependent_default_transport_maps and recipient routing

2010-11-29 Thread Victor Duchovni
On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 03:07:43PM -0500, Stirling, Scott wrote: > > > Thank you. With yours and Victor's input it sounds like I can do the > > > first relay with the existing Postfix processes, configuring a > > > sender_dependent relay to secondary instances of Postfix to handle > > > candidates

RE: sender_dependent_default_transport_maps and recipient routing

2010-11-29 Thread Stirling, Scott
> > Thank you. With yours and Victor's input it sounds like I can do the > > first relay with the existing Postfix processes, configuring a > > sender_dependent relay to secondary instances of Postfix to handle > > candidates for custom routing from this Sender. > > > > Then in the secondary Postfi

Re: sender_dependent_default_transport_maps and recipient routing

2010-11-29 Thread Victor Duchovni
On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 02:51:53PM -0500, Stirling, Scott wrote: > Thank you. With yours and Victor's input it sounds like I can do the > first relay with the existing Postfix processes, configuring a > sender_dependent relay to secondary instances of Postfix to handle > candidates for custom rout

RE: sender_dependent_default_transport_maps and recipient routing

2010-11-29 Thread Stirling, Scott
> >>> What I have not found and am for which I am requesting help, if > >>> anyone has a pointer or experience in this area, is the ability > >>> to combine the sender_dependent configuration with a recipient > >>> condition. Is there a straightforward way to configure this? > >>> Or do I need to s

Re: sender_dependent_default_transport_maps and recipient routing

2010-11-29 Thread Victor Duchovni
On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 01:22:31PM -0500, Stirling, Scott wrote: > > This requires a second internal delivery hop. > > > > The first to separate out the recipients or senders that are candidates > > for bypassing Postini into a separate queue, and the second to route > > appropriate mail from that

Re: sender_dependent_default_transport_maps and recipient routing

2010-11-29 Thread mouss
Le 29/11/2010 19:22, Stirling, Scott a écrit : What I have not found and am for which I am requesting help, if anyone has a pointer or experience in this area, is the ability to combine the sender_dependent configuration with a recipient condition. Is there a straightforward way to configure this

RE: sender_dependent_default_transport_maps and recipient routing

2010-11-29 Thread Stirling, Scott
> > What I have not found and am for which I am requesting help, if > > anyone has a pointer or experience in this area, is the ability > > to combine the sender_dependent configuration with a recipient > > condition. Is there a straightforward way to configure this? > > Or do I need to script a c

Re: sender_dependent_default_transport_maps and recipient routing

2010-11-29 Thread Victor Duchovni
On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 11:40:13AM -0500, Stirling, Scott wrote: > What I have not found and am for which I am requesting help, if anyone > has a pointer or experience in this area, is the ability to combine the > sender_dependent configuration with a recipient condition. Is there a > straightforw

sender_dependent_default_transport_maps and recipient routing

2010-11-29 Thread Stirling, Scott
Hi, I have a client with Postfix used as the main mail relay for a high volume e-commerce site. All mail to outbound destinations is relayed from sendmail processes to 2 main Postfix processes in the DMZ. Postfix relays everything to a separate Postini server outside. They've come to me w