[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       postfix-users
Subject:    Re: hash:/etc/postfix/network_table
From:       mouss <mlist.only () free ! fr>
Date:       2007-09-28 17:56:00
Message-ID: 46FD4030.1030403 () free ! fr
[Download RAW message or body]

Scott Ruckh wrote:
>>>
>>> If I run something like 'postmap -q 192.168.50.1
>>> hash:/etc/postfix/network_table', I get no response.  On the other hand,
>>> if I try 'postmap -q 192.168 hash:/etc/postfix/network_table' I get the
>>> response 'OK'.
>>>
>>
>> postmap != postfix.
>>
>> postmap tells you what is in the map, nothing more.
> 
> good point.
> 
>>
>> see Noel mail anyway.
> 
> Yep, I am just using the CIDR format as Noel mentioned.
> 
>>
> 
> I was just curious as I had seen a couple different posts with
> contradicting information.

the contraidction stems from the fact that you talk about the map
format, but not about the context in which it is used. sender_mx_access
 lookup is different than relay_recipient_maps lookup... etc.
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]