From: Tony Earnshaw (no email)
Date: Sun Feb 01 2004 - 06:03:41 EST
lør, 31.01.2004 kl. 22.12 skrev :
> I don't understand what this is trying is say. Perhaps some advanced
> steganographic technique was used to obscure the content? :-)
Steganography was not intended. I'll try again, new patch attached.
> - What are you trying to explain to the potential "maildrop"
> transport/command user?
That if that user normally uses LDAP-based lookups, using maildrop's
LDAP support the transport solution as given in MAILDROP_README will
disenable all Postfix LDAP-based lookups.
> - Don't use inline (parenthetical) comments when giving configuration
> examples, the newbies will use them verbatim, comments and all
Oh.
> - What is magic "-w 70" option.
A quota warning when 70% of the quota has been exceeded. People who use
maildrop will presumably have read the maildrop docs and know that. In
my case, I have LDAP-based quotas (an attribute of the objectclass
courierMailAccount). I've omitted it in the revised patch.
> - The text does not actually explain anything about LDAP and maildrop. At
> the very least one would typically want to do recipient validation for the
> case where maildrop is being used as virtual mailbox transport.
Of course, that's the whole point. The transport solution as given in
the README will obviate all recipient validation when using maildrop
with LDAP support. Try it for yourself ;)
> Please organize your thoughts more clearly and consicely. Focus on
> concrete examples.
No comment. I presume that people who use maildrop, procmail, anything
will have at least a modicum of understanding of the tool that they have
chosen to work with.
-- mail: billy - at - billy.demon.nl http://www.billy.demon.nl
|
|
|