Otdfbt

Last survivors from different time periods living together

What is the advantage of carrying a tripod and ND-filters when you could use image stacking instead?

Turing patterns

Why is the application of an oracle function not a measurement?

Russian equivalents of "no love lost"

Basic question about swap/swap spreads

How Can I Tell The Difference Between Unmarked Sugar and Stevia?

Is it possible to (7 day) schedule sleep time of a hard drive?

Do any instruments not produce overtones?

Phone number to a lounge, or lounges generally

From the list of 3-tuples, how can I select tuples which contain one for more nines?

Company did not petition for visa in a timely manner. Is asking me to work from overseas, but wants me to take a paycut

How to retract an idea already pitched to an employer?

When writing an error prompt, should we end the sentence with a exclamation mark or a dot?

Why don’t airliners have temporary liveries?

Does there exist a word to express a male who behaves as a female?

Java guess the number

How to project 3d image in the planes xy, xz, yz?

Notation of last measure of a song with a pickup measure

How did students remember what to practise between lessons without any sheet music?

Traffic law UK, pedestrians

Movie about a boy who was born old and grew young

How to translate “Me doing X” like in online posts?

Secure offsite backup, even in the case of hacker root access

Exchange: Universal Postmaster Setup

Site-wide server-side rules in Exchange 2003Exchange server “postmaster” addressTrying to set up a catch all e-mail in Exchange 2010Exchange 2007 Transport rule only works on SMTPExchange 2010 transport rules with external mailCatch All Email for Old Domain?Exchange Dropping Messages to Distribution Groupend user cannot email particular person from outlook, but I can - NDR received, address no longer validServer-side Outlook Out of Office Message only To a contacts group or not to a different groupExchange not putting mail to Junk despite SCL header value

.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty height:90px;width:728px;box-sizing:border-box;

0

I have an exchange server and around 200+ accepted domains (managed service company).

I would like to set up a catch all for postmaster@*
I tried doing so via transport rules, but exchange seems to be rejecting the messages "The e-mail address you entered couldn't be found" prior to applying the transport rule

Server: 2008 R2 running Exchange Server 2010 SP3

Test Transport rule:

• Conditions: When a recipient's address matches postmaster@.+
  


• Actions: send rejection message BEACON to sender with enhanced status code 5.7.777 (this would eventually become "redirect the message to address")

Are transport rules the/a correct choice here? Am I correct in guessing that it's checking address validity BEFORE matching a transport rule? Do any of the transport rule conditions get checked before mailbox existence is checked?

Note: I'm open to changing approach if I should be using something other than transport rules

Note: This is not a duplicate of 119649

email exchange

share|improve this question

edited May 20 at 23:17

Chris Rudd

asked May 20 at 20:29

Chris RuddChris Rudd

133

• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  Though I am fluent in powershell and could write a script to create a distribution list that includes them all, I want a solution that's self implementing without having to manually add new domains to that list, if at all possible.
  
  – Chris Rudd
  May 20 at 20:32
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  Can you not just have a scheduled task powershell up a list of accepted domains and then ensure that an alias for each domain is present? There would be no manual intervention required once its running - you may also be able to configure it to remove unnecessary aliases if domains are removed.
  
  – Semicolon
  May 21 at 15:13
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

0

I have an exchange server and around 200+ accepted domains (managed service company).

I would like to set up a catch all for postmaster@*
I tried doing so via transport rules, but exchange seems to be rejecting the messages "The e-mail address you entered couldn't be found" prior to applying the transport rule

Server: 2008 R2 running Exchange Server 2010 SP3

Test Transport rule:

• Conditions: When a recipient's address matches postmaster@.+
  


• Actions: send rejection message BEACON to sender with enhanced status code 5.7.777 (this would eventually become "redirect the message to address")

Are transport rules the/a correct choice here? Am I correct in guessing that it's checking address validity BEFORE matching a transport rule? Do any of the transport rule conditions get checked before mailbox existence is checked?

Note: I'm open to changing approach if I should be using something other than transport rules

Note: This is not a duplicate of 119649

email exchange

share|improve this question

edited May 20 at 23:17

Chris Rudd

asked May 20 at 20:29

Chris RuddChris Rudd

133

• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  Though I am fluent in powershell and could write a script to create a distribution list that includes them all, I want a solution that's self implementing without having to manually add new domains to that list, if at all possible.
  
  – Chris Rudd
  May 20 at 20:32
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  Can you not just have a scheduled task powershell up a list of accepted domains and then ensure that an alias for each domain is present? There would be no manual intervention required once its running - you may also be able to configure it to remove unnecessary aliases if domains are removed.
  
  – Semicolon
  May 21 at 15:13
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

I have an exchange server and around 200+ accepted domains (managed service company).

I would like to set up a catch all for postmaster@*
I tried doing so via transport rules, but exchange seems to be rejecting the messages "The e-mail address you entered couldn't be found" prior to applying the transport rule

Server: 2008 R2 running Exchange Server 2010 SP3

Test Transport rule:

• Conditions: When a recipient's address matches postmaster@.+
  


• Actions: send rejection message BEACON to sender with enhanced status code 5.7.777 (this would eventually become "redirect the message to address")

Are transport rules the/a correct choice here? Am I correct in guessing that it's checking address validity BEFORE matching a transport rule? Do any of the transport rule conditions get checked before mailbox existence is checked?

Note: I'm open to changing approach if I should be using something other than transport rules

Note: This is not a duplicate of 119649

email exchange

share|improve this question

edited May 20 at 23:17

Chris Rudd

asked May 20 at 20:29

Chris RuddChris Rudd

133

share|improve this question

edited May 20 at 23:17

Chris Rudd

asked May 20 at 20:29

Chris RuddChris Rudd

133

share|improve this question

edited May 20 at 23:17

Chris Rudd

asked May 20 at 20:29

Chris RuddChris Rudd

133

asked May 20 at 20:29

Chris RuddChris Rudd

133

asked May 20 at 20:29

Chris RuddChris Rudd

133

1 Answer
1

active

oldest

votes

0

When configuring a catch-all mailbox, we should disable recipients filtering on each server. Because messages pass through the Recipient Filter agent before passing through the Transport Rule agent, and the Recipient Filter agent will reject messages addressed to mailboxes that don’t exist.
Have you enabled anti-spam on Mailbox servers? If so, disable the recipient filtering and see if issue persists. For your reference https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/previous-versions/office/exchange-server-2010/bb691132(v%3dexchg.141)

share|improve this answer

edited May 22 at 1:43

answered May 21 at 9:56

Beverly GaoBeverly Gao

112

• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  I'm looking into this, is Recipient Filter only a binary option or can I configure it to still validate addresses that aren't postmaster@*? Also I noticed some places saying that if you have it enabled on a mailbox server it'll reject the entire message if ANY of the recipients are invalid, but my testing shows this might not be true (we're using only 1 server atm). We currently have it enabled
  
  – Chris Rudd
  May 22 at 16:28
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

Your Answer

StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "2"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);

else
createEditor();

);

function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);



);

draft saved

draft discarded

Sign up or log in

StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);

Sign up using Google

Sign up using Facebook

Sign up using Email and Password

Post as a guest

Name

Email

Required, but never shown

StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fserverfault.com%2fquestions%2f968144%2fexchange-universal-postmaster-setup%23new-answer', 'question_page');

);

Post as a guest

Name

Email

Required, but never shown

0

When configuring a catch-all mailbox, we should disable recipients filtering on each server. Because messages pass through the Recipient Filter agent before passing through the Transport Rule agent, and the Recipient Filter agent will reject messages addressed to mailboxes that don’t exist.
Have you enabled anti-spam on Mailbox servers? If so, disable the recipient filtering and see if issue persists. For your reference https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/previous-versions/office/exchange-server-2010/bb691132(v%3dexchg.141)

share|improve this answer

edited May 22 at 1:43

answered May 21 at 9:56

Beverly GaoBeverly Gao

112

• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  I'm looking into this, is Recipient Filter only a binary option or can I configure it to still validate addresses that aren't postmaster@*? Also I noticed some places saying that if you have it enabled on a mailbox server it'll reject the entire message if ANY of the recipients are invalid, but my testing shows this might not be true (we're using only 1 server atm). We currently have it enabled
  
  – Chris Rudd
  May 22 at 16:28
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

0

When configuring a catch-all mailbox, we should disable recipients filtering on each server. Because messages pass through the Recipient Filter agent before passing through the Transport Rule agent, and the Recipient Filter agent will reject messages addressed to mailboxes that don’t exist.
Have you enabled anti-spam on Mailbox servers? If so, disable the recipient filtering and see if issue persists. For your reference https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/previous-versions/office/exchange-server-2010/bb691132(v%3dexchg.141)

share|improve this answer

edited May 22 at 1:43

answered May 21 at 9:56

Beverly GaoBeverly Gao

112

• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  I'm looking into this, is Recipient Filter only a binary option or can I configure it to still validate addresses that aren't postmaster@*? Also I noticed some places saying that if you have it enabled on a mailbox server it'll reject the entire message if ANY of the recipients are invalid, but my testing shows this might not be true (we're using only 1 server atm). We currently have it enabled
  
  – Chris Rudd
  May 22 at 16:28
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

When configuring a catch-all mailbox, we should disable recipients filtering on each server. Because messages pass through the Recipient Filter agent before passing through the Transport Rule agent, and the Recipient Filter agent will reject messages addressed to mailboxes that don’t exist.
Have you enabled anti-spam on Mailbox servers? If so, disable the recipient filtering and see if issue persists. For your reference https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/previous-versions/office/exchange-server-2010/bb691132(v%3dexchg.141)

share|improve this answer

edited May 22 at 1:43

answered May 21 at 9:56

Beverly GaoBeverly Gao

112

share|improve this answer

edited May 22 at 1:43

answered May 21 at 9:56

Beverly GaoBeverly Gao

112

answered May 21 at 9:56

Beverly GaoBeverly Gao

112

answered May 21 at 9:56

Beverly GaoBeverly Gao

112