On Thu, Jan 29, 2004 at 01:46:15AM -0500, Eli said:
> Your problem with failing to relay for foo.com and instead assume it's local
> sounds not to be a problem with your relay router, but with your ACL
> statements.
>
> It sounds as if you have a verify = recipient BEFORE you accept for
> +relay_to_domains... Unless I've misinterpreted your problem :)
In fact, I do - smart man. What I have is this:
accept domains = +local_domains
endpass
message = unknown user
verify = recipient
accept domains = +relay_to_domains
endpass
message = unrouteable address
verify = recipient
Verifying recipient is trivial for the relay_to_domains, so I don't need
to do callouts. Should I switch the ordering of these statements, do
you think? That seems the easiest.
> Also, I don't believe you should be using "verify_recipient" (or any
> verification for that matter) for your relay router - it *should* be up to
> that remote final destination to dictate which accounts are valid and which
> are not.
Ordinarily, full ACK. On this box, I don't have the fastest link speed,
however, and my goal is to weed unnecessary bandwidth by not accepting
messages unnecessarily. The domains I am backup MX'ing are all small,
vanity-type domains with a stable userbase.
Thanks,
--
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Stephen Gran | If entropy is increasing, where is it |
| steve@??? | coming from? |
| http://www.lobefin.net/~steve | |
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
