On Tue, May 23, 2006 at 03:32:03PM +0200, H. Wilmer wrote:
Peter D. Gray wrote:
But when the mail gets to the stores, they kind of
get slow. It would be nice if the smtp system on the
mail stores knew its own limits and only accepted
email at a rate it can handle, but that is not the case.
rednux wrote:
The background:
Primary-MX is running 08:00 pm - 17:30 pm
Secondary-MX is running 24 Hours.
Just curious, why do you want to do it this way but not the other way round?
GH
--
## List details at http://www.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users
## Exim details at
Magnus Holmgren wrote:
Considering that, what's the actual benefit of using the defer_ok option?
Now you're quoting two sections relating to sender (callback) checks, but
from
my mail you quote the recipient (call-forward) check. I'm confused, but I'll
cover both ways.
Oh, sorry, it's
Rafe Slattery wrote:
I have an exim and cyrus installation set up, but when exim delivers the
mail to cyrus, they are showing up in the mail app without headers.
trusted_users = cyrus
## local delivery is with cyrus only!
local_delivery:
driver = lmtp
socket =
Magnus Holmgren wrote:
require verify = recipient/callout=10s,defer_ok
defer_ok ensures that mail will be accepted when the primary really *is* down.
The section in the docs on 'Callout verification' says:
Note that for a sender address, the
callback is not to the client host that is
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Your question is not related to exim in any way. Please play outside.
Your posting is not related to the question. Please post otherwhere.
GH
--
## List details at http://www.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users
## Exim details at http://www.exim.org/
## Please use
Marc Perkel wrote:
Just wondering how to do this. I'd like to test to see if the sending
host at port 25 open. Would this be a good way to detect spammers? Would
a host sending email to my host not have port 25 open to receive email?
Won't you rather want to check the host that is supposed
Illtud Daniel wrote:
system_aliases:
driver = redirect
allow_fail
allow_defer
senders = ${if exists {/etc/alias-restrictions/$local_part}\
{lsearch;/etc/alias-restrictions/$local_part}{*}}
file_transport = address_file
pipe_transport = address_pipe
Illtud Daniel wrote:
Was the recipient an alias?
Yes, sorry, I left that bit out.
So it does what you specified, but not what you wanted :)
GH
--
## List details at http://www.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users
## Exim details at http://www.exim.org/
## Please use the Wiki with this
Philip Hazel wrote:
Lots of things start failing when path names get longer than 256
characters (or perhaps 1024). I think 256 is a POSIX limit.
How does Exim handle that?
It could end up in running into some file system limit (like no more
free inodes though space left on the device) after
Michael Haardt wrote:
On Thu, Apr 27, 2006 at 05:14:27PM +0200, listrcv wrote:
The sieve filtering of Cyrus just falls back to delivering into the
inbox for deliveries into non-existing subfolders.
You do not need to change Exim to get that behaviour. Just have the file
transport check
Philip Hazel wrote:
It's the sysadmin who creates the string expansions and presumably
controls the contents of lookups. Or am I misunderstanding what you are
saying?
I'm not sure --- Exim offers so much flexibility that an admin setting
these things up may either be unaware of possible
Philip Hazel wrote:
Unless prevented by the create_directory option, Exim will always create
all the directories it needs.
Delivery will be deferred if anything Exim is trying to
create cannot be created.
Exim would create lots of directories when in some errorneous setup a
string
Marc Perkel wrote:
Comments like RTFM are neither polite or helpful.
What's the consensus about quoting the documentation instead of pointing
to it?
Ah, this isn't related to your quoting the wiki, pls don't misunderstand
me. I'm just curious if it would be considered appropriate quoting the
Ian Eiloart wrote:
--On 25 April 2006 15:20:32 +0200 listrcv [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Marc Perkel wrote:
Comments like RTFM are neither polite or helpful.
What's the consensus about quoting the documentation instead of pointing
to it?
Ah, this isn't related to your quoting the wiki, pls
Sub Zero wrote:
RFC). However, in practice, you will find it very hard to run an MTA
reliably without a static IP and reverse DNS.
In fact it is even easier than it is thought.. :)
How would you do it, to the full extend? Use dyndns?
GH
--
## List details at
Philip Hazel wrote:
However, in practice, you will find it very hard to run an
MTA reliably without a static IP and reverse DNS. That's just the way
it is.
It has disadvantages, but I do it at home, and it's much more reliable
then using a smarthost. I surely would like to have a static
Tony Finch wrote:
When the original RFCs were written *every* Internet host had a static
IP. It was taken for granted. That was the way the Internet worked. But
there was no DNS...
The newer RFCs don't mention this either (I suspect - I haven't read
every RFC).
They do require that the MTA
Heiko Schlittermann wrote:
If you're located in Germany (as I guess from your mail address) and
have some normal T-Online DSL with dynamic IP address, then it should be
possible to order a static IP for something around 3..5 € / month. (At
least some of our customers have it, and theses
W B Hacker wrote:
RFC-compliant MTA's are not expected to operate without a fixed-IP and
proper DNS entry.
Which RFC does specify that an MTA must have a static IP and DNS entries?
Smarthosts are too unreliable to be used.
GH
--
## List details at
the
mail for it.
GH
Marc Haber wrote:
On Wed, 05 Apr 2006 13:57:59 +0200, listrcv [EMAIL PROTECTED]
in exim3, there was an option to check the syntax of mail headers
(headers_check_syntax or so).
How do I enable that with exim4?
Cyrus complains about invalid headers, so I want to check them
Hi,
in exim3, there was an option to check the syntax of mail headers
(headers_check_syntax or so).
How do I enable that with exim4?
Cyrus complains about invalid headers, so I want to check them before
such mail is handed over to cyrus. Messages with invalid headers should
be rejected
Stanislaw Halik wrote:
On Wed, Apr 05, 2006, listrcv wrote:
in exim3, there was an option to check the syntax of mail headers
(headers_check_syntax or so).
How do I enable that with exim4?
try:
deny message = Your message does not conform to RFC2822 standard
log_message
Jeff Lasman wrote:
I wrote previously, I have to get a handle on how DirectAdmin handles
the routing of the Spam. I believe this will work and I'll work on the
exim.conf file as soon as I hear from the folk at DirectAdmin.
What is DirectAdmin?
Not filtering for spam works for me. Sure I
Gregg Berkholtz wrote:
After making the jump from Exim 3.35 to 4.60, my callouts are behaving
differently than expected. As they no longer appear to be checking the
domains MX, and instead perform callouts either back to the connecting
host, or hostname in the email address.
With 'verify =
Sergei Gerasenko wrote:
For example, if I do exim -DMACRO1 and MACRO1 is not defined in the
configuration file, .ifdef MACRO1 will return false. On the other hand,
if I do define that macro in the configuration file, .ifdef MACRO1 will
always be true (even if MACRO1 is defined as MACRO1=). So,
Bradley Walker wrote:
(1) × [EMAIL PROTECTED] F= R=spamcheck_director T=spamcheck: Child
process of spamcheck transport returned 2 from command: /usr/sbin/exim
(preceded by transport filter timeout while writing to pipe)
Spamd may eat some gigs(!) of RAM (besides clamad), so the server gets
Peter Bowyer wrote:
This will only help the OP if he moves away from his current
router/transport/spamc mechanism and starts to use the built-in
content scanning facilities.
Oh, sorry, that's true.
Well, then I recommend switching to the built-in scanning facilities first.
If that is out of
Hi,
local parts have unexpectedly become case sensitive with exim4.
Maybe I better turn that off? It'll likely confuse senders.
Or do I better leave it as it is for reasons I don't know?
How would I turn it off?
GH
--
## List details at http://www.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users
##
29 matches
Mail list logo
