From: Alex van den Bogaerdt (no email)
Date: Wed Jun 02 2004 - 07:55:01 EDT
On Wed, Jun 02, 2004 at 07:35:03AM -0400, wrote:
> The addition of @mydomain to header recipients is done only for messages
> that are already not RFC conformant.
I do not say otherwise. I just wish I could recognize this more easely.
That, or (prefered) use it to block.
This may not be a real problem for you but that does not mean I am
talking about something trivial or unimportant. I wouldn't spend
this much time if it doesn't matter much.
> Furthermore, if you configure a split relay (input handled by different
> Postfix instance than output) "myorigin = address.invalid" nicely solves
> the problem of how to qualify broken mail.
Tried several configurations. Eventually an issue comes up, generating
double bounces because address.invalid is invalid. Sure, this too can
be worked around. So I need a workaround for a workaround.
In the end it doesn't matter much since the exchange server will most
likely allow replies to user at address dot invalid, ending up in bitheaven
(blackhole) or as a double bounce. I need to tackle the problem at
input, not at output.
Add this to the not quite easy to maintain multiple instance setup
and _I_ have a _real_ problem that is not easely fixed.
> The result is that Postfix emits RFC conformant output even with
> non-conformant input. Lets move on to another topic please.
Rubbish in is rubbish out. It's just different rubbish.
I will discontinue with this thread. I understand that my priorities
are different from the general public's. Time to hack/workaround in the
code I guess.
It will take some time, much trial and error (especially error) but I
will get it right eventually.
No, this will not be a clean patch and no, I will thus not share.
Thanks for your answer,
Alex
-- I ask you to respect any "Reply-To" and "Mail-Follow-Up" headers. If you reply to me off-list, you'd better tell me you're doing so. If you don't, and if I reply to the list, that's your problem, not mine.
|
|
|