In article ![EMAIL PROTECTED],
nospam [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'd like to use the data available at SURBL and on their multi list (with
positives in spamassassin as listed in the header upward)...
I've therefore added following in my exim ACL conditions :
[...]
Could someone help me on this
because of this thread I downloaded again the exim source tarball
(the bz2 one) and noticed that its size has changed from the one I
downloaded the around the 1st of December.
The size of exim-4.60.tar.bz2 was 1554749, now it is 1556020. I
supposed it has been re-compressed, but why?
Would
On Tue, 14 Feb 2006, Potato Chip wrote:
Spamcheck:
# If user exists in /etc/passwd, pass username as argument
transport_filter = /usr/bin/spamc -x
${lookup{$local_part}lsearch{/etc/passwd}{-u $local_part}}
This is the error I get:
Expansion of
On Wed, 2006-02-15 at 09:51 +, Philip Hazel wrote:
The point of the MD5 checksum is to ensure that the distribution has not
been tampered with. If somebody breaks in to the FTP site and tampers
with the distribution, they could just as easily tamper with the
checksum.
Add a gpg
Quoth Richard Dunne on Wed, Feb 15, 2006 at 11:00:35 +
Hi was was messing in the ver/spool on a folder noting to do with exim4 ,,
now I get this error. Any ideas.
2006-02-15 10:53:32 1F9KHs-0006EX-No Failed to create spool file
/var/spool/exim_incoming/input//1F9KHs-0006EX-No-D:
Is this something I need to set, or is this something they've changed on
their mail server ?
Only ask, because we've made no changes to our server, and given its only
one client having the problem, I'm reluctant to make a change on our config
settings just for one person.
Mike
-Original
On Wed, 15 Feb 2006, huang mingyou wrote:
In my computer,I use mutt and fetchmail get and manage e-mail. And
now,I need send mail from our mail server,not from my locale
computer,but I don't want use another MUA. so I need configure the
exim4 server that in my locale server as a client
AIM:
I want to stop any hosts that I don't explicitly allow from accessing my
SMTP server.
BACKGROUND:
---
The MX records for my domains point to an external screening/filtering
service. This then relays the mail to my Exim server that contains the
mailboxes. I also receive local
I am toying with the idea of adding a router for all accepted messages to our
system which will initally simply increment a counter in a mysql DB. ie to get
hourly stats of all messages through system. we recieve 100k mails a day. Is
this the prefered way to get real time stats, will it have
Edward Kay wrote:
I want to stop any hosts that I don't explicitly allow from accessing my
SMTP server.
[...]
1. I considered adding deny hosts = !+relay_hosts
This is good.
at the top of the
check_recipient ACL (after accept hosts = : and require verify = sender).
From what I can see
Sorted. I mistakenly changed the permissions on spool.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Richard Dunne
Sent: 15 February 2006 11:01
To: exim-users@exim.org
Subject: [exim] (no subject)
Hi was was messing in the ver/spool on a folder
Hi,
I do now run spamassassin in the data acl, running as the recipients
user (I only allow one recipient at a time, that's okay for my traffic).
It denies spam over a certain threshold, and marks the rest as spam if
it's over another threshold. If it's marked as spam, it is later sent
through
All the servers I have been able to identify with this kind of log seem
to have the same version number. I guess they don't regard this as a
problem but more of a feature which is used to prevent spam because
they are refusing mails when 1 recipient is wrong.
What is funny is that on their page,
Fair enough. Can't you put the deny hosts = !+relay_hosts after these
checks?
I'm afraid this wouldn't help as the message would have already been
accepted by accept domains = +local_domains. (The problem is spammers
connect and set both the sender and recipient addresses to be in a local
Mike Jones wrote:
Is this something I need to set, or is this something they've changed on
their mail server ?
The former. Well, you don't need to, but it's likely to fix the problem.
They probably changed their firewall settings.
--
## List details at
On Wed, 2006-02-15 at 14:54 +0100, Jakob Hirsch wrote:
Mike Jones wrote:
Is this something I need to set, or is this something they've changed on
their mail server ?
The former. Well, you don't need to, but it's likely to fix the problem.
They probably changed their firewall settings.
Nigel Metheringham wrote:
I'm not sure that having a 30 second RFC1413 timeout is useful in any
normal circumstances nowadays. Best bet is to reduce it down to (say) 5
seconds.
I agree.
Then again if you have never used RFC1413 information or don't
know what it is you could just switch
Ok, thanks, I'll give that a go later tonight.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Jakob Hirsch
Sent: 15 February 2006 15:16
To: Nigel Metheringham
Cc: exim-users@exim.org
Subject: Re: [exim] 30 second wait for protocol timeout exceeded
Nigel
On Wed, 15 Feb 2006, Jakob Hirsch wrote:
I'm not sure that having a 30 second RFC1413 timeout is useful in any
normal circumstances nowadays. Best bet is to reduce it down to (say) 5
seconds.
I agree.
Do you think I should change the default to 5s?
Unix systems with shell access
On Wed, 2006-02-15 at 16:36 +, Philip Hazel wrote:
On Wed, 15 Feb 2006, Jakob Hirsch wrote:
I'm not sure that having a 30 second RFC1413 timeout is useful in any
normal circumstances nowadays. Best bet is to reduce it down to (say) 5
seconds.
I agree.
Do you think I
On Wed, 15 Feb 2006, Jakob Hirsch wrote:
As I understand, ident information was not intended to be useful for
the requesting system, but for the requested system.
Agreed. Nevertheless, there's a few tell-tale $sender_ident values
which are good for an immediate rejection: the ones which
Nigel Metheringham wrote:
On Wed, 2006-02-15 at 16:36 +, Philip Hazel wrote:
Do you think I should change the default to 5s?
Personally, yes. I don't think there are many sites for whom that is
both useful and they don't come back within 5 seconds.
I'd vote to disable ident lookups by
On Wed, 2006-02-15 at 16:56 +, Casey Allen Shobe wrote:
Hey all,
I've just set up exim (4.54) for the first time on one of our servers, and am
running the service using tcpserver (part of daemontools), executing
`/usr/sbin/exim -bdf -q15m`, and this works, however I would prefer to do
On Wednesday 15 February 2006 17:03, Nigel Metheringham wrote:
At present with an editor and a C compiler.
Is there a way to do it including the redundant timestamp prefixes?
Is there a TODO for logging to stdout?
--
Casey Allen Shobe | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | 206-381-2800
SeattleServer.com, Inc.
Hi, all!
How can I configure Exim to use different hostname for the HELO with other
Server depending by the IP I use for this route?
Example: I have 3 routes, that use 3 different IPs.
Can I use 3 different Hostname for the HELO with the remote Servers?
Thanks
--
On Wed, 15 Feb 2006, Alan J. Flavell wrote:
| Nowadays, however, our campus firewall blocks outgoing port 25 coming
| from any host that isn't a registered MTA, and the registered MTA
| hosts don't allow ordinary users to log on to them, so the scenario of
| needing to identify *users* who are
Luca Bertoncello [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb:
Example: I have 3 routes, that use 3 different IPs.
Can I use 3 different Hostname for the HELO with the remote Servers?
I describe it better:
How can I set a differente Hostname for HELO for different Transports?
Thanks
--
Philip Hazel wrote:
In mailertable (sendmail) I can write
.old-company.com = smtp:%1.new-company.com
In the CGP routing table I can write:
*.old-company.com = *.new-company.com
How do I achieve the same RHS expansion in an exim router (in route_data)?
What do you actually
Philip... Thanks for the insight. I was not aware that this is how the
parsing worked. I'm surprised there isn't an easier way, but at least
that will work. Thanks again!
Jae
-Original Message-
From: Philip Hazel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2006 1:46 AM
To:
On Wed, 15 Feb 2006, Chris Edwards wrote:
On Wed, 15 Feb 2006, Alan J. Flavell wrote:
| Nowadays, however, our campus firewall blocks outgoing port 25 coming
| from any host that isn't a registered MTA, and the registered MTA
| hosts don't allow ordinary users to log on to them, so the
Daniel Tiefnig wrote:
Nigel Metheringham wrote:
On Wed, 2006-02-15 at 16:36 +, Philip Hazel wrote:
Do you think I should change the default to 5s?
Personally, yes. I don't think there are many sites for whom that is
both useful and they don't come back within 5 seconds.
I'd vote
On 2/15/06 8:58 AM, Daniel Tiefnig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Nigel Metheringham wrote:
On Wed, 2006-02-15 at 16:36 +, Philip Hazel wrote:
Do you think I should change the default to 5s?
Personally, yes. I don't think there are many sites for whom that is
both useful and they don't come
Philip Hazel wrote:
Do you think I should change the default to 5s?
Yes. 5s should be enough for 99% of the connections, for the remainder:
Ident is (usually) non-critical for smtp.
I agree with the others that it would even not do big harm if ident
would be disabled by default, but I'm
Casey Allen Shobe wrote:
Is there a TODO for logging to stdout?
I doubt that you really want to log to stdout. tcpserver would send that
to the remote end.
Maybe something like log_file_path = /dev/stderr, otherwise you'll
have to change the sources. Should not be that hard...
--
## List
Luca Bertoncello wrote:
How can I set a differente Hostname for HELO for different Transports?
Set helo_data to whatever you want in your transports.
--
## List details at http://www.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users
## Exim details at http://www.exim.org/
## Please use the Wiki with this
That policy is rather likely to land you on a blacklist yourself.
How will using gmail/yahoo land you on a blacklist?
The thinking of blocking even the postmaster address thinking they can
use gmail/yahoo, akin to let them eat cake, that's of issue.
If your system does not accept mail to
Sub Zero wrote:
That policy is rather likely to land you on a blacklist yourself.
How will using gmail/yahoo land you on a blacklist?
The thinking of blocking even the postmaster address thinking they can
use gmail/yahoo, akin to let them eat cake, that's of issue.
If your system does
Anyone had experiences with heavily loaded boxes keeping stale messages in
queue for 100d? What caused this to happen for you? Any information is
appreciated :)
Thanks!
/m
--
## List details at http://www.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users
## Exim details at http://www.exim.org/
## Please
/m wrote:
Anyone had experiences with heavily loaded boxes keeping stale messages in
queue for 100d? What caused this to happen for you? Any information is
appreciated :)
Thanks!
/m
Is Exim still attempting to 'handle' the messages in question?
If so, I would scrutunize:
- the
W B Hacker wrote:
You may 'think it is OK..' but RFC's aside, mail to 'postmaster' is more
often generated by a 'daemon', not a human, so the chance of it
Not that I'd patronise blocking the postmaster address, but why do you
think that? The postmaster address is specifically for humans to
Jakob Hirsch wrote:
W B Hacker wrote:
You may 'think it is OK..' but RFC's aside, mail to 'postmaster' is more
often generated by a 'daemon', not a human, so the chance of it
Not that I'd patronise blocking the postmaster address, but why do you
think that? The postmaster address is
OK,thank you very much!
2006/2/15, Tony Finch [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Wed, 15 Feb 2006, huang mingyou wrote:
In my computer,I use mutt and fetchmail get and manage e-mail. And
now,I need send mail from our mail server,not from my locale
computer,but I don't want use another MUA. so I
On Wednesday 15 February 2006 21:08, Jakob Hirsch wrote:
I doubt that you really want to log to stdout. tcpserver would send that
to the remote end.
Umm, no. I'm not using tcpserver. And I said stderr/stdout in the subject
and body - i.e. whichever is appropriate. multilog will capture
* Casey Allen Shobe [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2006-02-16 01:38:13 +]:
On Wednesday 15 February 2006 21:08, Jakob Hirsch wrote:
I doubt that you really want to log to stdout. tcpserver would send that
to the remote end.
Umm, no. I'm not using tcpserver. And I said stderr/stdout in the
44 matches
Mail list logo
