Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

292061Re: LDAP canonical_maps and domain rewriting

Expand Messages
  • Fernando Maior
    Mar 19, 2013
    • 0 Attachment

      All this seems to be something very different from what postfix and other smtp usually does. So, may be the problem is with the concept, not with the implementation.

      May I ask you why you need to change the domain name part of the mail delivery address? Can you provide us with information on your mail accepting and delivery needs? 

      May be if you look from a different direction, you can see a different - and more appropriate - sollution.


      Fernando Maciel Souto Maior
      Projetos e Soluções de Tecnologia
      (31) 9669-5768 Claro
      (31) 9226-9440 TIM

      On Sun, Mar 17, 2013 at 10:54 PM, Viktor Dukhovni <postfix-users@...> wrote:
      On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 02:34:05AM +0100, Patrick Lists wrote:

      > >How do you manage users who have multiple email addresses? You should
      > >avoid domain to domain rewrites, and for each user list all the
      > >valid addresses.  Read:
      > >
      > >     http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-lachman-ldap-mail-routing-03
      > >
      > >where "maildrop" is called "mailRoutingAddress".
      > Thanks. Just read it and I switched to mailRoutingAddress.

      But this is still the delivery address attribute, not the additional
      address attribute, that is "mailAlternateAddress" in the draft.

      What matters to Postfix is not what name or OID you use, but what
      data you populate the attributes with.  You SHOULD populate the
      attributes with data that matches the attribute's published semantics,
      but this only matters if you use tools that assign fixed meanings
      to the attributes.  Postfix does not care which attribute is which
      it just does the lookups you configure.

      > >The canonical mapping has to match the actual process for managing
      > >your user addresses. Use the right attributes and define their
      > >semantics clearly.
      > Having read that draft it's clear now that I shouldn't be abusing
      > attributes for a purpose for which they are not intended.

      Except you are still trying to rewrite the mailbox delivery address
      back to a unique user, but mailbox delivery addresses are not in
      1-to-1 correspondence with users. The addresses that really do
      uniquely belong to the user should be in mailAlternateAddress,
      which is also known as mailLocalAddress in some documents.

      This is my last post on the subject, perhaps someone else can
      help if you're still confused.


    • Show all 18 messages in this topic