transport_maps equivalent for virtual mailboxes

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
6 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

transport_maps equivalent for virtual mailboxes

Stephen Ingram
I'm using virtual mailboxes (virtual_mailbox_domains, virtual_mailbox_maps, virtual_alias_maps) and now want to use something like transport_maps so I can control where the mail is relayed to based on the recipient domain. There appears to be no equivalent when you are using virtual mailboxes, like virtual_transport_maps. The documentation says that virtual_transport is only a final destination type of setting so I'm wondering if there is a different way to accomplish this.

Steve
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: transport_maps equivalent for virtual mailboxes

Noel Jones-2
On 9/14/2020 7:03 PM, Stephen Ingram wrote:

> I'm using virtual mailboxes (virtual_mailbox_domains,
> virtual_mailbox_maps, virtual_alias_maps) and now want to use
> something like transport_maps so I can control where the mail is
> relayed to based on the recipient domain. There appears to be no
> equivalent when you are using virtual mailboxes, like
> virtual_transport_maps. The documentation says that
> virtual_transport is only a final destination type of setting so I'm
> wondering if there is a different way to accomplish this.
>
> Steve

You're wanting to relay some set of users to another system for
final delivery?  Use transport_maps for that. The key in
transport_maps can either be the domain, or an individual user address.

If I have misunderstood your question, please give more details.



   -- Noel Jones
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: transport_maps equivalent for virtual mailboxes

Stephen Ingram
On Mon, Sep 14, 2020 at 5:20 PM Noel Jones <[hidden email]> wrote:
On 9/14/2020 7:03 PM, Stephen Ingram wrote:
> I'm using virtual mailboxes (virtual_mailbox_domains,
> virtual_mailbox_maps, virtual_alias_maps) and now want to use
> something like transport_maps so I can control where the mail is
> relayed to based on the recipient domain. There appears to be no
> equivalent when you are using virtual mailboxes, like
> virtual_transport_maps. The documentation says that
> virtual_transport is only a final destination type of setting so I'm
> wondering if there is a different way to accomplish this.
>
> Steve

You're wanting to relay some set of users to another system for
final delivery?  Use transport_maps for that. The key in
transport_maps can either be the domain, or an individual user address.

If I have misunderstood your question, please give more details.

What I really want is a recipient based relayhost_map, but I understand that doesn't exist. Everything points to that you need to use a transport map to push it on to the next destination. Does that make sense? Perhaps I'm trying to do too much on one server and need to push the virtual deliverables over to another server that can handle final delivery since this is really an outgoing server.

Steve 
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: transport_maps equivalent for virtual mailboxes

Noel Jones-2
On 9/14/2020 7:25 PM, Stephen Ingram wrote:
>
> What I really want is a recipient based relayhost_map,

Yes, use transport_maps for that, with a recipient email address as
the key.




   -- Noel Jones
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: transport_maps equivalent for virtual mailboxes

Stephen Ingram
On Mon, Sep 14, 2020 at 5:59 PM Noel Jones <[hidden email]> wrote:
On 9/14/2020 7:25 PM, Stephen Ingram wrote:
>
> What I really want is a recipient based relayhost_map,

Yes, use transport_maps for that, with a recipient email address as
the key.

But I thought you couldn't use transport_maps along with virtual_transport, no?

Steve 
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: transport_maps equivalent for virtual mailboxes

Noel Jones-2
The users you put in transport_maps don’t use virtual_transport, so there’s no conflict


  — Noel Jones

On Sep 14, 2020, at 8:31 PM, Stephen Ingram <[hidden email]> wrote:


On Mon, Sep 14, 2020 at 5:59 PM Noel Jones <[hidden email]> wrote:
On 9/14/2020 7:25 PM, Stephen Ingram wrote:
>
> What I really want is a recipient based relayhost_map,

Yes, use transport_maps for that, with a recipient email address as
the key.

But I thought you couldn't use transport_maps along with virtual_transport, no?

Steve