Re: [Sqlgrey-users] Using SQLgrey in an ISP environment

[Josh E. <jo...@en...>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Lionel Bouton wrote:
| But it doesn't work : the first pool did already accept the
message when
| the second wants to greylist.

Ahh I see now, this is what I was thinking also. I guess it will be
most effective if done on the first machine.

| I just realised that in fact it shouldn't be possible to do
greylisting
| after alias expansion. Let me explain :
| - Postfix handles the domain example.com
| - there'a an alias "adm...@ex..." expanding to the final
| recipients "pos...@ex..." and "ro...@ex...".
| - Postfix wants messages to root being greylisted and not messages to
| postmaster.
| - The greylister doesn't know yet that "se...@ot..." on
| 123.48.12.58 is a valid couple.
| - se...@ot... sends an e-mail from 123.48.12.58 to
| adm...@do...
| What should Postfix do ? It can't refuse the mail because postmaster
| doesn't want its incoming messages to be greylisted but at the
same time
| root doesn't want to receive messages that haven't been greylisted
so it
| can't accept it either.
|
| Conclusion : no greylisting before alias expansion

I'm confused. First you said it shouldn't be possible to greylist
after expansion, then you said no greylisting before expansion. I'm
guessing Postfix will do the alias resolution before policy, as
different "real" users may have different policies, but that's just
a hunch. I can test this to find out what happens.

Josh
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFBv/YDV/+PyAj2L+IRAuzPAJ41QAQkBOznOOPx4hMMrh+q6Brt6QCgrHY7
WcbailgdvWjnqiwHSAPoMoY=
=AVRV
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----