Il 19 Dec 2007 alle 22:11 Daniel Collis-Puro immise in rete
Leonardo Boselli wrote:
I want: avoid that the secondary mx accept email that in turn is
sent to the primary and then bounced. So i would like to set a list
of possible address that are accepted. such list however is not just
a
How do you limit the max recipients exim allows a message too have?
Search the docs for max_rcpt (global setting), or for $rcpt_count and
$recipients_count (which you can use in your RCPT ACL).
So will something like this work?
# Deny if excedes MAX_RCPT
deny message = More than MAX_RCPT
On Thu, Dec 20, 2007 at 02:59:46AM -0600, Matt wrote:
How do you limit the max recipients exim allows a message too have?
Search the docs for max_rcpt (global setting), or for $rcpt_count and
$recipients_count (which you can use in your RCPT ACL).
So will something like this work?
#
Phil,
You're correct, my thinking on this was completely backwards. The
router you provided works like a charm.
Thanks for the help!
Matt
Phil Pennock wrote:
On 2007-12-18 at 13:41 -0500, Matthew Soccio wrote:
I am testing a new server, which has the same user and auth data as the
--On 19 December 2007 21:25:15 +0100 Patrick von der Hagen
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Am Mittwoch, den 19.12.2007, 16:11 + schrieb Ian Eiloart:
[...]
I understand that the situation is difficult in Germany, but you're
really not allowed to reject spam? What if you're subject to a denial
Am Donnerstag, den 20.12.2007, 09:51 + schrieb Ian Eiloart:
[...]
But, this doesn't address the question of rejecting email. And, I don't see
anything in the rest of the email that suggests that you can't reject email
that you know to be spam.
In the first part I told you that you can do
[ changed Subject: since this is no longer helping the OP ]
On 2007-12-20 at 09:51 +, Ian Eiloart wrote:
Lots of the considerations below (privacy, for example) also apply in the
UK. You'd expect that, as we're both in the EU. However, none of the
considerations below prevent us from
On 2007-12-19 at 22:46 +0100, Leonardo Boselli wrote:
I have two servers and two more secondary MX.
I want: avoid that the secondary mx accept email that in turn is sent to
the primary and then bounced.
So i would like to set a list of possible address that are accepted.
such list however is
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Phil Pennock
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes
When I was postmaster at an ISP in NL, the Dutch legal situation was, to
my non-lawyer understanding,
naturally, your jurisdiction may differ -- and since there is a very
On Thu, 20 Dec 2007, Phil Pennock wrote:
There are no Directors since Exim3, so I think that you mean Routers.
ok ... but i remember they were called in the first exim4 documentation
director-routers
Make the very first Router something like (untested):
relay_domains_filter:
driver =
Hello everyone,
Is there any way to increase verbosity of debugging router condition? It's not
enough in one complicated case I have - I need (incoming mail) router to skip
one (outgoing) address and can't get it to work:
condition = ${if and { \
{ !eq [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thu, Dec 20, 2007 at 09:50:01AM +0100, Leonardo Boselli wrote:
Il 19 Dec 2007 alle 22:11 Daniel Collis-Puro immise in rete
Leonardo Boselli wrote:
I want: avoid that the secondary mx accept email that in turn is
sent to the primary and then bounced. So i would like to set a list
of
On Wed, Dec 19, 2007 at 10:46:01PM +0100, Leonardo Boselli wrote:
I have two servers and two more secondary MX.
I want: avoid that the secondary mx accept email that in turn is sent to
the primary and then bounced.
So i would like to set a list of possible address that are accepted.
such
Perfect example why NOT to use OOO ! ;-)
All the best
Phil
- Original Message -
From: Wesley Penner [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: exim-users@exim.org
Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2007 3:02 PM
Subject: [exim] Wesley Penner/MCC is on home leave.
I will respond to your message when I
On 20/12/2007, Phil (Medway Hosting) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Perfect example why NOT to use OOO ! ;-)
It was rather timely, wasn't it :-)
That subscriber is now on 'nomail'.
Peter
--
Peter Bowyer
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
## List details at
I will respond to your message when I return.
--
## List details at http://lists.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users
## Exim details at http://www.exim.org/
## Please use the Wiki with this list - http://wiki.exim.org/
Marcin Krol wrote:
Hello everyone,
Is there any way to increase verbosity of debugging router condition? It's
not
enough in one complicated case I have - I need (incoming mail) router to skip
one (outgoing) address and can't get it to work:
I've been known to use such gross hacks as:
Hi,
Exim has a useful feature to evaluate expansions from the shell: exim -be ''
Is there a simiar feature to that will return the final value of a
macro after the configuration file has been parsed?
Something like:
exim.conf:
...snip...
EXIMDIR = /srv/exim
TABLES = EXIMDIR/tables
I found ratelimiting in Exim documentation.
http://www.exim.org/exim-html-current/doc/html/spec_html/ch40.html#SECTratelimiting
What I want is to mainly limit my own users. A week ago I had a user
who had there username and password stolen apparently by a virus or
something. Someone from south
On Thu, 20 Dec 2007, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
On Thu, Dec 20, 2007 at 09:50:01AM +0100, Leonardo Boselli wrote:
Il 19 Dec 2007 alle 22:11 Daniel Collis-Puro immise in rete
Why not use a recipient verification callout for the destination mail
server? Something like:
NOT feasible:
Sure it
Phil (Medway Hosting) wrote:
It's not collateral spam. It's just plain spam. That's the point I would
make to the powers that be !!
It is not spam, because it is neither unsolicited (by emailing someone
you allow them to respond, whether automated or not, I would say) nor
bulk. You shouldn't
- Original Message -
From: Jeroen van Aart [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: exim-users@exim.org
Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2007 7:39 PM
Subject: Re: [exim] Out of Office and collateral spam
Phil (Medway Hosting) wrote:
It's not collateral spam. It's just plain spam. That's the point I
would
Phil (Medway Hosting) wrote:
The vacation utility on unix seems smart enough to not be a nuissance
and still be functional for those who need it.
I don't know that offhand but as long as it only sends to known contacts
then yes it would be ok to use.
To send to known contacts you need to
Hi, As a preliminary step to setting up a working
bounce parser I am using exim filter to pipe a bounce
to the parser script. The result:
Child process of address_pipe transport returned 2 from command:
/home/rvh/perl-tst/bpt.pl
The parser just opens the mail and an output file for the report
On 2007-12-20 at 14:23 +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
Look for 'smtp_reserve_hosts'. With this, you can allow the backup MX to
connect to the master even when the master is already 4xx'ing other
hosts because of things like smtp_load_reserve.
Look up Single Point Of Failure.
The point of
On 2007-12-20 at 13:20 +0100, Marcin Krol wrote:
Is there any way to increase verbosity of debugging router condition? It's
not
enough in one complicated case I have - I need (incoming mail) router to skip
one (outgoing) address and can't get it to work:
Ye, this expression doesn't seem
I found ratelimiting in Exim documentation.
http://www.exim.org/exim-html-current/doc/html/spec_html/ch40.html#SECTratelimiting
I added this to my exim.conf
# Slow down fast senders; note the need to truncate $sender_rate
# at the decimal point.
warn ratelimit = 100 / 1h / per_rcpt / strict
On 2007-12-20 at 16:23 -0600, Matt wrote:
# Slow down fast senders; note the need to truncate $sender_rate
# at the decimal point.
warn ratelimit = 100 / 1h / per_rcpt / strict
delay = ${eval: ${sg{$sender_rate}{[.].*}{}} - $sender_rate_limit
}s
Is there a way I can get it to
# Slow down fast senders; note the need to truncate $sender_rate
# at the decimal point.
warn ratelimit = 100 / 1h / per_rcpt / strict
delay = ${eval: ${sg{$sender_rate}{[.].*}{}} -
$sender_rate_limit }s
Is there a way I can get it to add meaning full log entries so I
On 2007-12-20 at 17:37 +, Terry Burton wrote:
Otherwise, is there a recommended way to obtain such values from a
shell script without having to hardcode the value or grep the Exim
config?
With well-defined data syntaxes and exiting after first match (anchored
to the start of the line) grep
On 2007-12-20 at 13:49 -0800, Robert Van Horn wrote:
The parser just opens the mail and an output file for the report
then runs bounce_parser on it - closes the files - quits.
My tests so far have been in the form of ./bpt.pl testmail.doc.
With the existing file in the same dir there is no
On 2007-12-20 at 16:44 -0600, Matt wrote:
I imagine something like this would work?
So would I, but I've not gotten around to actually playing with rate
limiting (since these days I just have a personal server running Exim,
so it's not such an issue).
# Slow down fast senders; note the need to
On Dec 20, 2007 10:42 PM, Phil Pennock [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 2007-12-20 at 17:37 +, Terry Burton wrote:
Otherwise, is there a recommended way to obtain such values from a
shell script without having to hardcode the value or grep the Exim
config?
With well-defined data syntaxes
Hello,
Is there a new version of exim (4.69) available? The official website
says nothing about it. The list archives don't mention any new release but
$ cat /usr/ports/mail/exim/distinfo
MD5 (exim/exim-4.69.tar.bz2) = 6f29f073328c858d8554b08cc0c3c2be
SHA256 (exim/exim-4.69.tar.bz2) =
Thanks Phil, sometimes the obvious is hard for me.
bob
On Thu, Dec 20, 2007 at 02:53:59PM -0800, Phil Pennock wrote:
The mail is provided on the script's standard input. You'll need to
read up on stdio, redirections and pipes for background material, but
pipes are integral to the power and
Hullo, I think it's not lying as long as you brought down the latest ports as
20th Dec 2007. Or a few days less.
Confirm and go ahead.
Regards.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of zbigniew szalbot
Sent: Friday, December 21, 2007 9:18 AM
36 matches
Mail list logo
