So then i can assume it would be more proper to do LMTP over Unix Socket?
I can do either, i just am trying to find the best method to do this.
Thanks
--On Wednesday, May 15, 2002 8:10 AM -0500 Amos Gouaux
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>>>> On Tue, 14 May 2002 12:09:14 -0600,
>>>>>> Scott M Likens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (sml) writes:
>
> sml> May 13 15:52:32 shell postfix/lmtp[21546]: [ID 197553 mail.info]
> sml> 614D48A84E: to=<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> sml> relay=shell.bourg.net[207.229.76.2], delay=1, status=deferred (host
> sml> shell.bourg.net[207.229.76.2] said: 430 Authentication required)
>
> Ugh, README_FILES/LMTP_README really does need updating. I should
> try to do that during our inter-session. Anyway, if you're doing
> LMTP over a TCP connection, you'll either need to use LMTP-AUTH
> (like SMTP-AUTH), or use the "-a" flag as in:
>
> SERVICES {
> ...
> lmtp cmd="lmtpd -a" listen="[127.0.0.1]:lmtp" prefork=0
> ...
> }
>
> Though, if you use the "-a" flag, be sure to restrict access to
> this LMTP server. This can be done by either binding to a specific
> IP address as done above and/or by using tcp_wrappers.
>
> sml> Also has anyone seen this with the new postfix 1.1.9-Experimental?
>
> sml> May 13 15:39:38 shell postfix/lmtp[17534]: [ID 947731 mail.warning]
> sml> warning: spurious attribute sender in input from lmtp socket
>
> Not yet. I was waiting for the dust to settle a bit before trying
> latest Postfix snapshot/release.
>
> --
> Amos
>
>
