Hi All
Just want to say thanks for having a look at my problem!
So here goes:
Trying to setup a postfix with postscreen, mailscanner, calmav and mailwatch
(Running on Centos 6.3)(postfix 2.6.6)
Everything is working fine, so now when I want to do the last thing and
activate postscreen on
* Ove JK. Evensen o...@itandnet.co.uk:
Hi All
Just want to say thanks for having a look at my problem!
So here goes:
Trying to setup a postfix with postscreen, mailscanner, calmav and mailwatch
(Running on Centos 6.3)(postfix 2.6.6)
http://www.postfix.org/postscreen.8.html
HISTORY
Am 11.09.2012 09:54, schrieb Ove JK. Evensen:
/usr/libexec/postfix/postscreen: No such file or directory
have a look there
--
Best Regards
MfG Robert Schetterer
Thanks, feel a bit stupid now..
OVE JK. EVENSEN | CHIEF ENGINEER
-Original Message-
From: owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org [mailto:owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org]
On Behalf Of Ralf Hildebrandt
Sent: 11 September 2012 09:07
To: postfix-users@postfix.org
Subject: Re: Postscreen
OK, last question:
I am looking here: http://www.postfix.org/packages.html and then - here for
centos http://ramix.jp/~ramsy/postfix.html
And it says the last version is a 2.6 so clearly that is the reason why I get
this in centos:
Setting up Install Process
Package
Am 11.09.2012 10:08, schrieb Ove JK. Evensen:
OK, last question:
I am looking here: http://www.postfix.org/packages.html and then - here for
centos http://ramix.jp/~ramsy/postfix.html
And it says the last version is a 2.6 so clearly that is the reason why I get
this in centos:
Setting
-Original Message-
From: owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org [mailto:owner-postfix-
us...@postfix.org] On Behalf Of Ove JK. Evensen
Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2012 10:09 AM
To: postfix-users@postfix.org
Subject: RE: Postscreen Error: /usr/libexec/postfix/postscreen: No
such file or
On 2012.09.10. 16:46, Wietse Venema wrote:
They just read it from the victim's mail folder.
Simson Garfinkel collected hundreds of second-hand disk drives, and
a good way to identify the user of the disk was to look for the
most frequent email address.
Hi all,
I have a question about bounce template.
My problem is that when the bounce is sent Charset, From, Subject and
Postmaster (as indicated in http://www.postfix.org/bounce.5.html) are
inserted in the body of mail and not used for the respective funciont on
the sent mail.
I only
Domain Singh:
[ Charset ISO-8859-1 unsupported, converting... ]
On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 8:13 PM, DN Singh dnsingh@gmail.com wrote:
On Sep 10, 2012 7:02 PM, Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org wrote:
DN Singh:
Sep 10 *18:15:34* hostname postfix/master[1227]: reload -- version
KSB:
On 2012.09.10. 16:46, Wietse Venema wrote:
They just read it from the victim's mail folder.
Simson Garfinkel collected hundreds of second-hand disk drives, and
a good way to identify the user of the disk was to look for the
most frequent email address.
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 4:21 PM, Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org wrote:
Domain Singh:
[ Charset ISO-8859-1 unsupported, converting... ]
On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 8:13 PM, DN Singh dnsingh@gmail.com wrote:
On Sep 10, 2012 7:02 PM, Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org wrote:
Andrea Cappelli:
Hi all,
I have a question about bounce template.
My problem is that when the bounce is sent Charset, From, Subject and
Postmaster (as indicated in http://www.postfix.org/bounce.5.html) are
inserted in the body of mail and not used for the respective funciont on
the
Il 11/09/2012 12:58, Wietse Venema ha scritto:
First, test with postconf -b. If the result is right then something
down-stream is messing up Postfix's bounces. Wietse
The test with postconf -b shows no error and expand the variable
$myhostname to the right value, but Charset and and other
On 2012.09.11. 13:56, Wietse Venema wrote:
Your specialized niche problem is not in the 90% of the problem
space that Postfix solves. Postfix does not have to solve all
problems.
Wietse
So You suggest to stick with other MTA?
__
KSB
DN Singh:
What is the output from:
postmap -q rediffmail.com hash:/etc/postfix/transport
The command gives below output:
==
domain3:
==
What is the output from:
postconf | grep '^domain3'
Is this really domain3 or are you
Andrea Cappelli:
Il 11/09/2012 12:58, Wietse Venema ha scritto:
First, test with postconf -b. If the result is right then something
down-stream is messing up Postfix's bounces. Wietse
The test with postconf -b shows no error and expand the variable
$myhostname to the right value, but
KSB:
On 2012.09.11. 13:56, Wietse Venema wrote:
Your specialized niche problem is not in the 90% of the problem
space that Postfix solves. Postfix does not have to solve all
problems.
So You suggest to stick with other MTA?
Yes. I am perfectly happy when Postfix solves 90% well.
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 5:43 PM, Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org wrote:
DN Singh:
What is the output from:
postmap -q rediffmail.com hash:/etc/postfix/transport
The command gives below output:
==
domain3:
==
Il 11/09/2012 14:15, Wietse Venema ha scritto:
Basic Internet email: no whitespace before a header label. Wietse
Thank you for your support, now works as expected
Best regards
--
Andrea Cappelli
Asidev s.r.l.
On 2012.09.11. 15:20, Wietse Venema wrote:
Yes. I am perfectly happy when Postfix solves 90% well. Especially
because those 90% are not just the easy problems.
Wietse
I like Posftix so this is a hard decision to switch to other MTA to not
have to cut down features for clients...
DN Singh:
I had a doubt about concurrency. Can it be that there are multiple
connections to the destination? Although documentation suggests otherwise.
The logging shows that the connections in my real-life example are
separated by 5 seconds. The logging also shows that the messages
were
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 04:26:07PM +0530, DN Singh wrote:
domain3_destination_rate_delay = 30s
domain3_destination_recipient_limit = 1
This combination is unlikely to yield the results you expect. When
a transport's recipient limit is set to 1, its concurrency is
measured *per-mailbox*, not
Viktor Dukhovni:
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 04:26:07PM +0530, DN Singh wrote:
domain3_destination_rate_delay = 30s
domain3_destination_recipient_limit = 1
This combination is unlikely to yield the results you expect. When
a transport's recipient limit is set to 1, its concurrency is
On 11/9/2012 11:33 πμ, Rob Sterenborg wrote:
Simon J. Mudd creates RHEL RPM packages:
http://ftp.wl0.org/official/2.9/
The above doesn't seem to have any CentOS 6 RPMs/SRPMs.
I currently only know of:
http://centos.alt.ru/pub/repository/centos/6/SRPMS/postfix-2.9.4-1.el6.src.rpm
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 6:38 PM, Viktor Dukhovni postfix-us...@dukhovni.org
wrote:
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 04:26:07PM +0530, DN Singh wrote:
domain3_destination_rate_delay = 30s
domain3_destination_recipient_limit = 1
This combination is unlikely to yield the results you expect. When
a
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 03:54:52PM +0300, KSB wrote:
On 2012.09.11. 15:20, Wietse Venema wrote:
Yes. I am perfectly happy when Postfix solves 90% well. Especially
because those 90% are not just the easy problems.
I like Posftix so this is a hard decision to switch to other MTA to
not have to
DN Singh:
We some trouble with rediff deliveries, and therefore were trying this
combination. While searching the archives, we found that rediff does not
like connection caching, and about the recipient_limit option. The rate
With recipient_limit=1, the Postfix scheduler will try to deliver
Hi,
I'd like to point out a possibile typo at
http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#qmgr_message_recipient_limit:
[…] the maximal *size of the size* of the short-term, in-memory dead
destination status cache.
Thanks,
Fabio Sangiovanni
Fabio Sangiovanni:
Hi,
I'd like to point out a possibile typo at
http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#qmgr_message_recipient_limit:
[?] the maximal *size of the size* of the short-term, in-memory
dead destination status cache.
Thanks, I routinely use a double word detector, but I don't
Thanks, I routinely use a double word detector, but I don't have
a double multi-word detector.
Wietse
I'm glad I was of help :)
Have a nice day!
Fabio
Asai:
Greetings,
Trying to send email from an iPad which fails consistently. I'm trying
to send via port 587, TLS (self-signed cert, which is installed on
iPad). iPad tells me that Password authentication isn't supported.
smtpd_sasl_auth_enable = yes
smtpd_sasl_exceptions_networks =
Hello!
I wish to anonimize my users' mail and cut of some headers. But only
from my clients authenticated throw smtp auth. Mail from others domains
not mine should not be affected cause it breaks dkim checks (for example
from gmail).
I've tried headers_check but it changes headers in all letters.
* gsom g...@gsom.msk.ru:
Hello!
I wish to anonimize my users' mail and cut of some headers. But only
from my clients authenticated throw smtp auth. Mail from others domains
not mine should not be affected cause it breaks dkim checks (for example
from gmail).
I've tried headers_check but it
I don't think the problem will be with the marketing software, i.e. the
component generating the messages, that is the easy part. The harder part is
on the MTA to deliver those. Long ago I saw a request from a customer that
wanted to be able to send out 1M in an hour I believe it was. I
* Noel Jones njo...@megan.vbhcs.org [2012-09-10 23:23 -0400]:
On 9/10/2012 9:20 PM, David J. Weller-Fahy wrote:
1) Am I correct that blocking recipient addresses which consist of
an existing user with an extension not defined by that user (in a
.forward-extension file) is not possible using
David J. Weller-Fahy:
-- Start of PGP signed section.
* Noel Jones njo...@megan.vbhcs.org [2012-09-10 23:23 -0400]:
On 9/10/2012 9:20 PM, David J. Weller-Fahy wrote:
1) Am I correct that blocking recipient addresses which consist of
an existing user with an extension not defined by that
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 03:45:03PM -0500, Chad M Stewart wrote:
Long ago I saw a request from a customer that wanted to be able
to send out 1M in an hour I believe it was.
$ echo 10 6 ^ 3600 / p | dc
277
This is 277 messages per second, and does not require any extreme
On 9/11/2012 4:33 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
David J. Weller-Fahy:
-- Start of PGP signed section.
* Noel Jones njo...@megan.vbhcs.org [2012-09-10 23:23 -0400]:
On 9/10/2012 9:20 PM, David J. Weller-Fahy wrote:
1) Am I correct that blocking recipient addresses which consist of
an existing user
On 9/11/2012 3:30 PM, Patrick Ben Koetter wrote:
* gsom g...@gsom.msk.ru:
Hello!
I wish to anonimize my users' mail and cut of some headers. But only
from my clients authenticated throw smtp auth. Mail from others domains
not mine should not be affected cause it breaks dkim checks (for
40 matches
Mail list logo
