|
From: SourceForge.net <no...@so...> - 2008-07-18 20:31:16
|
Bugs item #1958315, was opened at 2008-05-06 00:17 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by christian_boltz You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=937964&aid=1958315&group_id=191583 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: None Group: None Status: Open Resolution: None >Priority: 4 Private: No Submitted By: Roel Adriaans (helldesk) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) >Summary: Possible to make alias without mailbox - want loop detection Initial Comment: In 2.2.0 with the alias_control settings to "NO" I can make this alias (as Admin): fo...@ba... -> fo...@ba... Since there is no fo...@ba... mailbox the mail gets rejected by postfix. There is a catch-all Address on the bar.com domain, doesn't have any effect. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Comment By: Christian Boltz (christian_boltz) Date: 2008-07-18 22:31 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=593261 Originator: NO You have basically created a mail loop. Without having it tested, I guess you see a "too many hops" bounce. The catch-all isn't used because postfix sees fo...@ba... as the better option and doesn't even check if there is a catch-all. Yes, we could check for alias == goto && mailbox_doesn't_exist However, I think this is a corner case. And even if we test for direct loops, indirect loops (foo@ -> bar@, bar@ -> foo@) will have the same problem. Recursive loop detection would be a nice feature, but also requires lots of programming. I'll lower the priority for now - and I'll happily accept patches ;-) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=937964&aid=1958315&group_id=191583 |
