Hello -
On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 3:05 PM, Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org wrote:
http://www.postfix.org/BASIC_CONFIGURATION_README.html
with CentOS 6 I've ended up adding
inet_interfaces = all
virtual_alias_domains = videoskat.de balkan-preferans.de
to /etc/postfix/main.cf and
Tue, 08 Jan 2013 16:24:11 -0600 skrev Noel Jones
njo...@megan.vbhcs.org:
On 1/8/2013 4:11 PM, Titanus Eramius wrote:
I've had some trouble seeing the difference
between -o overrides in main.cf and master.cf, but this really
helps.
main.cf parameters are used by all postfix
Tue, 08 Jan 2013 23:59:31 +0100 skrev mouss mo...@ml.netoyen.net:
This raises the question (or at least I think it do), if it's
possible to force the users onto 587 by denying relay access to
25?
fix the problem at the source: force the client to do the work:
use different services
Hi Guys,
I noticed lots of errors like this on my log files:
Client host rejected: Please try primary mx first (in reply to RCPT TO
command))
So I checked the domain and it has multiple mx servers, with different priority
each one.
Then I ask: why is postfix using secondary mx server
Alexander Farber:
Hello -
On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 3:05 PM, Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org wrote:
http://www.postfix.org/BASIC_CONFIGURATION_README.html
with CentOS 6 I've ended up adding
inet_interfaces = all
virtual_alias_domains = videoskat.de balkan-preferans.de
You
Rafael Azevedo:
Then I ask: why is postfix using secondary mx server unstead of
trying sending to primary first? Is there anyway to force this
out?
Why do you believe the error messageas from random mail servers?
Postfix always respects the MX preference order. If you believe
it does not,
Why do you believe the error messageas from random mail servers?
Because for some reason the secondary mail server is telling me to send to
primary first, very simple. If it were sending to primary, then we should not
get this error, right?
But maybe the DNS is giving me wrong information
Am 16.01.2013 14:57, schrieb Rafael Azevedo:
Why do you believe the error messageas from random mail servers?
Because for some reason the secondary mail server is telling me to send to
primary first, very simple. If it were sending to primary, then we should not
get this error, right?
Rafael Azevedo:
Postfix always respects the MX preference order. If you believe
it does not, then YOU must show the tcpdump packet recording.
I do believe that, but for some reason I'm getting this error when
postfix for some reason seems to be sending to secondary MX servers.
When I run
Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2013 18:30:13 +
From: postfix-us...@dukhovni.org
To: postfix-users@postfix.org
Subject: Re: Problem in postfix (solaris) relay to exchange
On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 06:18:03PM +, carlos jorge wrote:
but I found a difference:
man postconf -A List the
On 1/16/2013 3:13 AM, Titanus Eramius wrote:
Tue, 08 Jan 2013 16:24:11 -0600 skrev Noel Jones
njo...@megan.vbhcs.org:
main.cf parameters are used by all postfix services (but not all
parameters apply to all services).
Individual services defined in master.cf can override main.cf
settings
Thanks to Robert and Wietse, it was very clearful.
-- Rafael
Rafael Azevedo:
Thanks to Robert and Wietse, it was very clearful.
By the way, if you use transport maps, then Postfix does not
look up the MX hosts for the recipient domain. Instead it
looks up the MX hosts for the domain in the transport map result.
If the domain in the transport map result
Bernhard Schmidt:
Hello,
I did not find it in the manpage, in the odd chance I missed it, is
there something like check_sasl_access or check_username_access for
smtpd_mumble_restrictions?
We just had a compromised account being abused for spamming. We had him
on the radar before he
Am 16.01.2013 22:39, schrieb Wietse Venema:
Bernhard Schmidt:
Hello,
I did not find it in the manpage, in the odd chance I missed it, is
there something like check_sasl_access or check_username_access for
smtpd_mumble_restrictions?
We just had a compromised account being abused for spamming.
I'm running a server on average week we receive 14,000, send 19,000, and in
total deferred/bounced/rejected 5,000 -- Can you guys recommend a good
antivirus that will work well with postfix. Meaning efficient in processing
emails without dropping them into oblivion or kill the server CPU and/or
-Original Message-
From: owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org [mailto:owner-postfix-
us...@postfix.org] On Behalf Of TFML
Sent: Thursday, 17 January 2013 7:55 AM
To: Postfix users
Subject: Recommendations for antivirus
I'm running a server on average week we receive 14,000, send
Le 16/01/2013 23:17, Terry Gilsenan a écrit :
-Original Message-
From: owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org [mailto:owner-postfix-
us...@postfix.org] On Behalf Of TFML
Sent: Thursday, 17 January 2013 7:55 AM
To: Postfix users
Subject: Recommendations for antivirus
I'm running a server on
On 1/16/2013 3:44 PM, Bernhard Schmidt wrote:
Am 16.01.2013 22:39, schrieb Wietse Venema:
Bernhard Schmidt:
Hello,
I did not find it in the manpage, in the odd chance I missed it, is
there something like check_sasl_access or check_username_access for
smtpd_mumble_restrictions?
We just had
Steve Jenkins:
I've got two machines on my network - mailer1 and mailer2. Both running
Postfix 2.9.5. I've got
smtp_fallback_relay = mailer2.example.com
configured in mailer1's main.cf.
The way smtp_fallback_relay is implemented, it adds each relay as
a low-priority MX host with a safety
On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 4:00 PM, Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org wrote:
The way smtp_fallback_relay is implemented, it adds each relay as
a low-priority MX host with a safety check: if the relay does not
resolve, then mail is not bounced.
Hey, Wietse. I appreciate the reply.
Ok - as far
Steve Jenkins:
qshape isn't showing deferred mail on mailer1, though. qshape deferred is
all zeros. The active queue is massive, however (over 91K messages in it
now) and more than half of them are in the 1280 column.
When a destination replies to mailer1 like this:
Jan 16 16:10:15
On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 4:12 PM, Steve Jenkins stevejenk...@gmail.comwrote:
Should that not trigger handing the message over to the fallback relay for
subsequent attempts?
Hold on... maybe it IS handing it off, now that I look at it more closely.
This is from mailer1:
Jan 16 16:14:32 mailer1
On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 4:22 PM, Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org wrote:
With smtp_skip_5xx_greeting = yes by default, Postfix pretends
that the session failed due to a temporary error and tries the next
MX host (or fall-back relay).
If the mail is still in the active queue then Postfix is
On 1/16/2013 6:23 PM, Steve Jenkins wrote:
So I guess I should change my question - it looks like mailer1 is
attempting to deliver to 5 AOL mail servers before passing off to the
relay. Any way I can make it hand off to the fallback relay with fewer
attempts?
Why not simply spread the
Steve Jenkins:
This is from mailer1:
[5x 554 greeting]
mtain-mc05.r1000.mx.aol.com ESMTP not accepting connections
Jan 16 16:14:40 mailer1 postfix-aol/smtp[1732]: 97092438FFD: to=
xx...@example.com, relay=mailer2.example.com[xx.xx.xx.xx]:25, delay=7365,
delays=6096/1261/8.3/0.13, dsn=2.0.0,
Steve Jenkins:
I guess my only other option is to turn off smtp_skip_5xx_greeting, in
which case it will hand off to mailer2 on the first failure, correct?
Nope. 5xx is a permanent delivery error.
Wietse
On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 4:35 PM, Stan Hoeppner s...@hardwarefreak.com
wrote:
Why not simply spread the newsletter load over both your outbounds to
begin with?
Until this week, we were using an OLD server to act as our fallback relay
(graveyard) machine and nothing else, since we really
On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 4:35 PM, Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org wrote:
You can twiddle with smtp_mx_mumble_limit, but why bother sending
from mailer1, when the mail is accepted only from mailer2?
I think mailer1 got blocked initially by AOL because my
aol_destination_concurrency_limit,
On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 4:35 PM, Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org wrote:
You can twiddle with smtp_mx_mumble_limit
FYI - Google returns NO results (nor does the search function on
Postfix.org... since it's Google-powered) for smtp_mx_mumble_limit. Any
docs on that?
SteveJ
Hello guys!
I was reading the smtp_fallback_relay doc at
http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#smtp_fallback_relay and couldn't be able
to make it work.
It says:
smtp_fallback_relay (default: $fallback_relay)
[…]
With bulk email deliveries, it can be beneficial to run the
Steve Jenkins:
On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 4:35 PM, Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org wrote:
You can twiddle with smtp_mx_mumble_limit
FYI - Google returns NO results (nor does the search function on
Postfix.org... since it's Google-powered) for smtp_mx_mumble_limit. Any
docs on that?
On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 5:27 PM, Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org wrote:
mumble is a wild-card.
grep smtp_mx_ in postconf output.
DOH! Roger that. :)
Also, any way to use transport in some way on mailer1 to tell Postfix to
use mailer2 for aol.com addresses? I could set that temporarily
33 matches
Mail list logo
