RE: [Exim] Migration of a 3.36 mail hub

Top Page
Delete this message
Reply to this message
Author: Silviu Herchi
Date:  
To: exim-users
Subject: RE: [Exim] Migration of a 3.36 mail hub
Hello,

I'll reply to myself as I found the answer in an unrelated topic...

In the router that handles the routing_domain (that is, after the routing
has taken place), the data option can simply be set to
$local_part@final_domain... Some quick tests show it should work.

As for Frank Elsner's reply, we had already tried the configure file
converter, but it separates the original routers into two parts, and the
$local_part in the second one was not the same as in the first part.

Anyway, it seems to be OK now, thanks to all!

Silviu


-----Message d'origine-----
De : exim-users-admin@??? [mailto:exim-users-admin@exim.org] De la part
de Silviu Herchi
Envoyé : mercredi 30 juin 2004 14:25
À : exim-users@???
Objet : [Exim] Migration of a 3.36 mail hub

Hello,

We are in charge of a large corporate mail hub running Exim 3.36 and we wish
to upgrade it to 4.34.

The current production Exim is configured to lookup the user names in
several aliases files. The aliases convert the address domain into a
"virtual" domain, used only for routing purpose. Once the routing decision
has been made, the address is written back to a domain specific to the final
destination at transport time using the "new_address" option.

Here is an example of mail routing:

- incoming mail for foo@???

- a router handling acme.com finds "foo" in an alias file with the following
definition "foo: foo@routing_domain" (routing_domain is used only for
routing, it is not defined at all outside of Exim)

- another router accepts mail for routing_domain and is configured with
"new_address = $local_part@final_domain" and the right transport

- at transport time, the mail is delivered and the enveloppe is rewritten as
specified in the new_address option

This setup works fine with Exim 3.36.

However, new_address has disappeared in Exim 4, and transport time rewriting
works only for headers (and optionally sender address, but we want recipient
address to be rewritten as well). General rewriting is not suitable either
beacause it rewrites foo@routing_domain as foo@final_domain before the
routing takes place.