I have recipient_delimiter = + in main.cf (Postfix). But deliveries to dovecot/deliver are still being rejected. It appears that the full email is still in the envelope (e.g. phil+howard at example.com which I want to be delivered to phil at example.com). Is that how it's supposed to work and Dovecot just doesn't support this?
On 2010-05-26 4:20 PM, Phil Howard wrote:> I have recipient_delimiter = + in main.cf (Postfix). But deliveries > to dovecot/deliver are still being rejected. It appears that the full > email is still in the envelope (e.g. phil+howard at example.com which I > want to be delivered to phil at example.com). Is that how it's supposed > to work and Dovecot just doesn't support this?postconf -n output and logs can be helpful... -- Best regards, Charles
On Wed, 26 May 2010 16:20:06 -0400 Phil Howard <ttiphil at gmail.com> articulated:> I have recipient_delimiter = + in main.cf (Postfix). But deliveries > to dovecot/deliver are still being rejected. It appears that the full > email is still in the envelope (e.g. phil+howard at example.com which I > want to be delivered to phil at example.com). Is that how it's supposed > to work and Dovecot just doesn't support this?On or about line 821 in the Dovecot.conf file: #auth_username_chars = abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyzABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ01234567890.-_@ If you have not all ready done so, add the "+" to the end of the list and un-comment the line. I believe you will have to restart 'dovecot' for the change to take affect. By the way, Postfix must be properly configured to pass the email address to dovecot. I leave that as an exercise to the user. You might want to start here thought: http://wiki.dovecot.org/LDA/Postfix -- Jerry Dovecot.user at seibercom.net Disclaimer: off-list followups get on-list replies or get ignored. Please do not ignore the Reply-To header. __________________________________________________________________ XML is a giant step in no direction at all. Erik Naggum
On 2010-05-27 1:42 PM, Phil Howard wrote:> Yup, there was a 2nd setting nearly at the bottom of the file, and > it was different. Thanks for catching that.This is why you *always* go by what output pof postconf -n says, not what you think you put in main.cf. You wasted a lot of time (yours and others here) on that unnecessarily... -- Best regards, Charles
On Fri, May 28, 2010 at 17:30, Charles Marcus <CMarcus at media-brokers.com> wrote:> On 2010-05-28 5:01 PM, Phil Howard wrote: >> On Fri, May 28, 2010 at 16:53, Charles Marcus wrote: >>> The whole purpose of the -n output is to provide clean, easy to read >>> *settings* as seen by postfix (as opposed to comments that are meant for >>> people). > >> So you are saying that this is not meant for people? > > <sigh> yeah, so I worded it badly... > > Of course it is meant for people, but it is meant to show only the bare > minimum of what postfix sees as the settings. It is left up to you, the > sys admin, to be able to interpret the data as presented, bearing in > mind all caveats (ie, that last setting wins)...And that caveat was something I was not aware of, as it is an usual method.