Tom Allison wrote:
I'm going by recent memory so please be kind if I miss something.
I recall in the greylisting docs that under DATA and something else only
one recipient is transmitted. Is that also true immediately following
the RECIPIENT block?
Is just the first one listed or any
On Tue, Oct 07, 2008 at 02:58:52PM +0200, mouss wrote:
Johan Andersson wrote:
Hi,
We are thinking to implement some form of greylisting at one of our sites
and wonder which one of the many flavors out there
that this group have found reliable?
I know postfix has its builting one from a
mouss wrote:
LÉVAI Dániel wrote:
Hi!
I'm using postfix-2.5.4.
I have this in my main.cf:
smtpd_client_restrictions = check_client_access
hash:/etc/postfix/client_access, permit_sasl_authenticated,
reject_unknown_client_hostname
It seems that the reject_unknown_client_hostname is applied
On 10/7/2008 9:26 AM, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
Does the default:
delay_warning_time = 0h
really mean that the sender would get the warning immediately if the
message wasn't able to be delivered immediately?
Please read the docs carefully:
To enable this feature, specify a non-zero time
This server is only the secondary mail server for incoming mail, so it
won't be bouncing anything just passing it onto the primary server which
does perform valid recipient checks. I don't see any point doing it here
too as it just means more hits against the AD servers for no greater
effect,
Hi!
I'm using postfix-2.5.4.
I have this in my main.cf:
smtpd_client_restrictions = check_client_access
hash:/etc/postfix/client_access, permit_sasl_authenticated,
reject_unknown_client_hostname
It seems that the reject_unknown_client_hostname is applied always
before the other rules, and
On Tue, Oct 07, 2008 at 03:13:20PM +0200, L?VAI D?niel wrote:
postfix/smtpd[23810]: warning: 78.131.56.68: hostname
78-131-56-68.static.hdsnet.hu verification failed: no address associated
with name
postfix/smtpd[23810]: connect from unknown[78.131.56.68]
postfix/smtpd[23810]: NOQUEUE:
Postgrey is based on a Berkeley database. So it's going to tricky
getting your 6 MTA's to play nice. But it has a sound approach for
managing the list.
I don't know about the others. But you might want to look for
something that has a networked database.
On Oct 7, 2008, at 7:44 AM, Johan
On Oct 7, 2008, at 7:44 AM, Johan Andersson wrote:
Hi,
We are thinking to implement some form of greylisting at one of our
sites and wonder which one of the many flavors out there
that this group have found reliable?
I know postfix has its builting one from a while back, but feel
unsure
On 10/6/2008 7:18 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
Can I set up DNS (and MX records) for several different domains to
point to the same postfix instance/host/IP address and reference
that same postfix instance/host/IP by different DNS host names
(smtp.example1.com, smtp.example2.com, etc), and have
Hi,
What is probably a *very* obvious question...
Does the default:
delay_warning_time = 0h
really mean that the sender would get the warning immediately if the
message wasn't able to be delivered immediately?
--
Best regards,
Charles
I have a weird issue where a sender with a valid reverse DNS entry is
getting rejected.
main.cf:
===
smtpd_delay_reject = yes
smtpd_client_restrictions =
...
reject_unknown_reverse_client_hostname
Oct 4 19:04:21 postfix/smtpd[231]: connect from unknown[64.68.XXX.XXX]
Oct 4 19:04:21
On Tue, Oct 07, 2008 at 10:49:46AM -0400, Darek M. wrote:
I have a weird issue where a sender with a valid reverse DNS entry is
getting rejected.
main.cf:
===
smtpd_delay_reject = yes
smtpd_client_restrictions =
...
reject_unknown_reverse_client_hostname
Oct 4 19:04:21
Bill Cole:
so I guess the answer is to
tell him no, and if whatever it is is important, and he gets the
warning, to follow the message up with a phone call (he should be doing
that anyway for anything mission critical, but getting some people to
understand that email is not a 100%
* Charles Marcus [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Hi,
What is probably a *very* obvious question...
Does the default:
delay_warning_time = 0h
really mean that the sender would get the warning immediately if the
message wasn't able to be delivered immediately?
Please read the docs carefully:
To
From http://jimsun.linxnet.com/misc/postfix-anti-UCE.txt
OK stops processing of an access list and the restriction stage
that contains it. Processing resumes with the next restriction
stage (if any).
Situation
smtpd_restriction_classes =
Thanks for the clarifications. I've compiled virtual and progress is being made.
As we receive around 100 000 mails a day, I assume that doesn't fall into the
category of low volume, so I don't think reject_unverified_recipient would be
suitable, nor is maintaining a list of valid e-mail
I'm going by recent memory so please be kind if I miss something.
I recall in the greylisting docs that under DATA and something else
only one recipient is transmitted. Is that also true immediately
following the RECIPIENT block?
Is just the first one listed or any particular order?
What
Isnt ASSP more than just greylisting?
On Oct 7, 2008, at 8:08 AM, Jason Pruim [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Oct 7, 2008, at 7:44 AM, Johan Andersson wrote:
Hi,
We are thinking to implement some form of greylisting at one of our
sites and wonder which one of the many flavors out there
that
On Tue, Oct 07, 2008 at 01:44:25PM +0200, Johan Andersson wrote:
Hi,
We are thinking to implement some form of greylisting at one of our sites
and wonder which one of the many flavors out there
that this group have found reliable?
I know postfix has its builting one from a while back, but
Victor Duchovni wrote:
On Tue, Oct 07, 2008 at 10:49:46AM -0400, Darek M. wrote:
I have a weird issue where a sender with a valid reverse DNS entry is
getting rejected.
main.cf:
===
smtpd_delay_reject = yes
smtpd_client_restrictions =
...
reject_unknown_reverse_client_hostname
Oct
Hi! I have looked in www.postfix.org (docs, howto FAQ, thats how I
got it working so far) Googled and I have searched the archives, but
can't get it to work (but as a postfix noob, I could search for wrong
things :-( ). I also have Dovecot, spamassassin, amavisd-new,
postfixadmin RoundCube
Hi,
Check: http://www.postfix.org/basic.html#relaying
Seems to me like you just need to add your lan addresses in mynetworks.
/Victor
raffe reinoso wrote:
Hi! I have looked in www.postfix.org (docs, howto FAQ, thats how I
got it working so far) Googled and I have searched the archives, but
raffe reinoso:
smtpd_recipient_restrictions = permit_sasl_authenticated,
permit_mynetworks, reject_unauth_destination, check_policy_service
inet:127.0.0.1:2501
If this is your greylisting service, and you don't want to greylist
local network clients, then you need to change your mynetworks
Kenneth Marshall a écrit :
On Tue, Oct 07, 2008 at 02:58:52PM +0200, mouss wrote:
Johan Andersson wrote:
Hi,
We are thinking to implement some form of greylisting at one of our sites
and wonder which one of the many flavors out there
that this group have found reliable?
I know
Charles Marcus wrote:
On 10/7/2008, Wietse Venema ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
But the virtual how-to says the opposite... never list a
virtual_mailbox_domain in mydestination...
If you list smtp.example.com as a virtual domain, then do not list
it in mydestination.
Ok... more confusion...
On 10/7/2008 3:09 PM, mouss wrote:
but, example.com (the domain, not the hostname) is also listed in
virtual_mailbox_domains via the mysql lookup...
Is this OK/normal? I'm thinking yes, because:
yes, it's ok.
Ok, good... :)
Note that both smtp.example.com and example.com are FQDN.
Right,
Charles Marcus wrote:
On 10/7/2008 3:09 PM, mouss wrote:
Note that both smtp.example.com and example.com are FQDN.
Right, but the latter can never be a _host_ name...
of course it can:
# hostname example.com
# hostname
example.com
Is there any place that discusses the pros/cons of per
Le Tue 7/10/2008, Charles Marcus disait
On 10/7/2008 3:09 PM, mouss wrote:
but, example.com (the domain, not the hostname) is also listed in
virtual_mailbox_domains via the mysql lookup...
Is this OK/normal? I'm thinking yes, because:
yes, it's ok.
Ok, good... :)
Note that
I have a server with several public IP addresses (aliases on one network
card), running Postfix.
The machine also runs several websites, which interact with the users
(forums, automated responses for queries etc.).
I would like to configure each website to send mails via a different
IP
Charles Marcus wrote:
On 10/7/2008 3:09 PM, mouss wrote:
but, example.com (the domain, not the hostname) is also listed in
virtual_mailbox_domains via the mysql lookup...
Is this OK/normal? I'm thinking yes, because:
yes, it's ok.
Ok, good... :)
Note that both smtp.example.com and
I'm attempting to get sender_dependent_relayhost_maps working on
postfix 2.5.1. What I'm trying to do is this: all mail from
[EMAIL PROTECTED] should be sent out from a different mail server,
because SPF has been set to that IP address. All others should use the
default relay, indicated in
Wietse Venema schrieb:
Tomasz Chmielewski:
I have a server with several public IP addresses (aliases on one network
card), running Postfix.
The machine also runs several websites, which interact with the users
(forums, automated responses for queries etc.).
I would like to configure each
On 10/7/2008, Victor Duchovni ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
This is false. DNS allows SOA, NS and A (or ) records to exist at
the same level (for the same domain name). So a delegated domain name
(zone cut) can also be a host. What is not legal is CNAME records in
combination with NS or SOA,
Victor Duchovni schrieb:
On Tue, Oct 07, 2008 at 10:31:40PM +0200, Tomasz Chmielewski wrote:
I have a server with several public IP addresses (aliases on one network
card), running Postfix.
The machine also runs several websites, which interact with the users
(forums, automated responses
Tomasz Chmielewski wrote:
Wietse Venema schrieb:
Tomasz Chmielewski:
I have a server with several public IP addresses (aliases on one
network card), running Postfix.
The machine also runs several websites, which interact with the users
(forums, automated responses for queries etc.).
I
On Mon, Sep 08, 2008 at 08:15:24AM +0200, mouss wrote:
In both cases, the symptom is that postfix, upon being restarted,
responds to nc -v -v localhost 25' with an accept and then an
immediate disconnect. A second connection succeeds, but no banner is
being printed.
no need to use nc.
Tomasz Chmielewski wrote:
Victor Duchovni schrieb:
On Tue, Oct 07, 2008 at 10:31:40PM +0200, Tomasz Chmielewski wrote:
I have a server with several public IP addresses (aliases on one
network card), running Postfix.
The machine also runs several websites, which interact with the
users
postconf -n when trying to use SASL
alias_database = hash:/etc/aliases
alias_maps = hash:/etc/aliases, hash:/var/lib/mailman/data/aliases
append_dot_mydomain = no
biff = no
config_directory = /etc/postfix
home_mailbox = Maildir/
inet_interfaces = all
mailbox_command = /usr/bin/procmail -t -a
mouss wrote:
Tomasz Chmielewski wrote:
mouss schrieb:
Tomasz Chmielewski wrote:
Basically, if Postfix can specify the source IP address, that should
be fine for me... provided that it can make some decisions here
(i.e., which outgoing interface to choose, depending on From: or
Received:
On Tue, Oct 07, 2008 at 04:32:06PM -0600, Steve Lindemann wrote:
fyi... the systems giving me the most grief all use ironport filters and
they all started complaining within a few days of each other. I suspect
some software update on the ironport but need data to prove I'm not
We have implemented HELO restrictions for our postfix configuration to
attempt to cut down on the amount of spam.
Unfortunately this has turn up a lot of legitimate servers that have been
incorrectly configured. That is to say, they do not have dns entries for
their mail servers.
Whilst we are
mouss wrote:
[snip]
unknown_hostname_reject_code = 550
smtpd_helo_required = yes
smtpd_helo_restrictions =
reject_invalid_hostname
reject_non_fqdn_hostname
check_helo_access hash:/etc/postfix/helo_access
reject_unknown_hostname
In /etc/postfix/helo_access I
# /etc/postfix/sender_maps.regexp
/@example\.com$/ [192.168.10.3]
/./ [192.168.10.5
- do not index a regexp table with postmap.
- you can use pcre rather than regexp above if your postfix supports pcre
tables.
Ah I misunderstood the precedence, thinking that relayhost in main.cf
would be
On Tue, Oct 07, 2008 at 04:07:28PM -0500, Noel Jones wrote:
As documented, relayhost takes precedence over
sender_dependent_relayhost_maps.
http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#sender_dependent_relayhost_maps
My reading of the code in 2.4, 2.5 and 2.6 is that sender dependent
relayhost
Victor Duchovni:
On Tue, Oct 07, 2008 at 04:07:28PM -0500, Noel Jones wrote:
As documented, relayhost takes precedence over
sender_dependent_relayhost_maps.
http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#sender_dependent_relayhost_maps
My reading of the code in 2.4, 2.5 and 2.6 is that sender
Hi folks,
Debian Etch
Postfix 2.3.8
Dovcot
I'm learning to setup virtual mailbox domain class. Please shed me
some light on its setup;
On /etc/postfix/main.cf
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 373 2008-09-30 03:26 dynamicmaps.cf
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 2108 2008-10-03 12:54 main.cf
-rw-r--r--
Richard Wurman wrote:
I think my problem is related to my regular expression syntax. What is
the pcre equivalent to regexp's: /@example\.com$/ ?
I want to match on @billing.domain2.com .. AFAIK there are subtle
differences between pcre and regexp syntax and the most basic stuff
is the same?
Wietse Venema wrote:
Victor Duchovni:
On Tue, Oct 07, 2008 at 04:07:28PM -0500, Noel Jones wrote:
As documented, relayhost takes precedence over
sender_dependent_relayhost_maps.
http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#sender_dependent_relayhost_maps
My reading of the code in 2.4, 2.5 and 2.6
Lists wrote:
I have spent the last couple of hours trying to get TLS working, sadly
no luck.
When I telnet and and do STARTTLS I get the error no server certs
available TLS won't be enabled.
I followed the instructions on the how to forge (the link I was given
before was a tad over my head)
Hi
I am seeing some odd behaviour with virtual_alias_maps
I have a domain set up in ldap directorylets call it whatIwant.com. It
has an email address of [EMAIL PROTECTED] set up.
Note: it is a different domain to the one specified in the mydomain
parameter.
I have mailman setup, it contains
Will have a go at those instructions thanks.
I don't want to make things difficult for our clients. I like the setup
that allows the client to use pop details to authenticate - I even
managed to get that working ;)
What I was trying to do with TLS was to encrypt the password that gets
sent
For example in this hash I wanna OK for all domains except mail.ru and
yandex.ru:
hash:/etc/postfix/maps/check_sender:
mail.ru REJECT
yandex.ru REJECT
all other OK
So what I must write insteed of all other? Maybe . (single point)?
Thanks.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, 8 October 2008 2:12 PM
To: postfix-users@postfix.org
Subject: how to specify any/catch_all domain/email in HASH
access map?
For example in this hash I
On Wed, Oct 08, 2008 at 01:31:13PM +1100, Darragh Gammell wrote:
Hi
I am seeing some odd behaviour with virtual_alias_maps
I have a domain set up in ldap directorylets call it whatIwant.com. It
has an email address of [EMAIL PROTECTED] set up.
Note: it is a different domain to the
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
For example in this hash I wanna OK for all domains except mail.ru and
yandex.ru:
hash:/etc/postfix/maps/check_sender:
No, you do not want an OK for all domains except those two. You want a
DUNNO, which is the default; so just REJECT those domains.
56 matches
Mail list logo
