From: Matt Fretwell (no email)
Date: Wed Jun 01 2005 - 10:16:45 EDT
Victor Duchovni wrote:
> > If the recipient is *not* listed in virtual_*_maps, but the recipient
> > domain is a valid domain, virtual or otherwise, the method with access
> > and transport should also work, should it not? Or have I missed
> > another quirk of virtual_*?
> The OP had a virtual alias domain. While one can implement recipient
> validation for relay domains via access(5) tables, and indeed this is
> sometimes necessary because access(5) handles domain hierarchies more
> flexibly than relay_recipient_maps, there is no need to replace virtual
> alias domains with anything more complex. They just work. As I said, for
> virtual alias mailboxes the transport table is ignored, they *must* be
> rewritten.
Aye, sorry. That was where I made my error. I use *relay*_domains with
virtual_alias_maps and access maps, for achieving those weird requirements
which sometimes crop up. (Just checked my config). As you mention, access
is far more flexible than the *_recipient_maps. And the above, whilst
possibly not the preferred method of doing things, does cover just about
every conceivable requirement one might encounter :)
Matt
|
|
|