On 2013-11-07 Ram wrote:
Is there a simple way I can configure postfix to convert all Envelope
From and To addresses to lowercase, before delivery
I believe postfix internally converts all ids to-lowercase while
doing hash map lookups
I need this because that will save all unnecessary
Am 07.11.2013 11:32, schrieb Ansgar Wiechers:
On 2013-11-07 Ram wrote:
Is there a simple way I can configure postfix to convert all Envelope
From and To addresses to lowercase, before delivery
I believe postfix internally converts all ids to-lowercase while
doing hash map lookups
I need
Hi,
I have a postfix instance on Debian 6 that has never performed DNS
lookups with version number 2.7.1-1+squeeze1.
The mail.log lists all connections like
Nov 6 17:40:54 lo postfix/smtpd[10283]: 4AD4292:
client=unknown[82.2.1.3], sasl_method=PLAIN,
sasl_username=exam...@example.com
Nov
On 2013.11.07 08:38:36 +0100, nik600 wrote:
reading your answer i've understand that the service on 465 is already
configured to force encryption, but i can't to that on port 25 because this
port is used also for standard delivery from other mailserver which is not
encrypted.
'-o
On 07 Nov 2013, at 12:19, Simon Loewenthal si...@klunky.co.uk wrote:
I have a postfix instance on Debian 6 that has never performed DNS lookups
with version number 2.7.1-1+squeeze1.
The mail.log lists all connections like
Nov 6 17:40:54 lo postfix/smtpd[10283]: 4AD4292:
nik600:
Thanks all for the information.
I try to explain better what is my goal:
i want to force all my sasl users to use SSL, so i've given them 2 option:
you can auth using STARTSSL on standard port 25
you can auth using TLS/SSL on standard port 465
Mail servers connect to port 25
Simon Loewenthal:
I have a postfix instance on Debian 6 that has never performed DNS
lookups with version number 2.7.1-1+squeeze1.
The mail.log lists all connections like
Nov 6 17:40:54 lo postfix/smtpd[10283]: 4AD4292:
client=unknown[82.2.1.3], sasl_method=PLAIN,
Hi Wietse,
Chroot was not turned on.
#
==
# service type private unpriv chroot wakeup maxproc command + args
# (yes) (yes) (yes) (never) (100)
#
==
On 2013-11-07 6:39 AM, Simon Loewenthal si...@klunky.co.uk wrote:
Chroot was not turned on
Look again...
#
==
# service type private unpriv chroot wakeup maxproc command + args
# (yes) (yes) (yes)
Simon Loewenthal:
# service typeprivate unpriv chroot ...
# (yes) (yes) (yes) ...
#
==
smtpinetn - - ...
Turn off the damned chroot.
Wietse
Damned chroot now turned off, and lookups now work like they should have
done :D
And this nicely solved my RDNS_NONE scoring issue with SA, of course!
Nov 7 12:49:16 lo postfix/smtpd[15712]: 32FD892:
client=english-breakfast.cloud9.net[168.100.1.7]
Thanks, I did not think that chroot had
Hi,
I'm looking for pointers on how to do conditional routing on non-domain related
information in Postfix.
For example:
I currently have an Exim MTA configured to query a LDAP server for the
physicalDeliveryOfficeName field.
It returns a value for the branch to route the message to e.g. Cape
* Chris Visser chris.vis...@rtt.co.za:
Hi,
I'm looking for pointers on how to do conditional routing on non-domain
related information in Postfix.
For example:
I currently have an Exim MTA configured to query a LDAP server for the
physicalDeliveryOfficeName field.
It returns a value
On 07 Nov 2013, at 12:53, Simon Loewenthal si...@klunky.co.uk wrote:
Damned chroot now turned off, and lookups now work like they should have done
:D
And this nicely solved my RDNS_NONE scoring issue with SA, of course!
Nov 7 12:49:16 lo postfix/smtpd[15712]: 32FD892:
Am 07.11.2013 12:53, schrieb Simon Loewenthal:
Damned chroot now turned off, and lookups now work like they should have done
:D
And this nicely solved my RDNS_NONE scoring issue with SA, of course!
Nov 7 12:49:16 lo postfix/smtpd[15712]: 32FD892:
Ram skrev den 2013-11-07 08:06:
Is there a simple way I can configure postfix to convert all Envelope
From and To addresses to lowercase, before delivery
hmp, is there another underlaying problem you like postfix to solve ?
unix accounts with mixed case ?, virtual users with mixed case ?
if
On 11/07/2013 08:38 PM, nik600 wrote:
you can auth using STARTSSL on standard port 25
Port 25 should be for MX to MX communication, not for submission.
you can auth using TLS/SSL on standard port 465
Port 465 is SMTPS which is deprecated.
You should be using the submission port (587) with
Is there a limit on a number of connections or number of emails could
be sent from an ip?
The reason why I am asking is... There is this workstation which is
able to connect to other ports of the postfix server and, at the same
time, other workstations could connect to postfixes smtp port.
Any
On 11/7/2013 1:27 PM, Roman Gelfand wrote:
Is there a limit on a number of connections or number of emails could
be sent from an ip?
Postfix does have some limits. If a client exceeds the limits,
postfix will no longer accept mail from the client, and the offense
is noted in the logs. Some of
Hi list
I really got a weird problem with one of my postfix installations and
the mysql lookup. The weird thing is that it works on two of my three
postfix installtions.
Have the following .cnf file for the mysql lookup
hosts = 192.168.200.113
port = 3308
user = postfix
password = XX
Tobi:
Hi list
I really got a weird problem with one of my postfix installations and
the mysql lookup. The weird thing is that it works on two of my three
postfix installtions.
Have the following .cnf file for the mysql lookup
Copy the same config file to different machines and try:
On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 01:59:51PM +, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
exchangerelay unix - - n - - smtp
-o smtp_sasl_mechanism_filter=!gssapi,login
To support Exchange MSAs on Windows 2003 generically (less critical
state in per-relay policy entries):
exchangerelay unix - - n - -
Am 07.11.2013 23:02, schrieb Wietse Venema:
Tobi:
Hi list
I really got a weird problem with one of my postfix installations and
the mysql lookup. The weird thing is that it works on two of my three
postfix installtions.
Have the following .cnf file for the mysql lookup
Copy the same config
On Thu, Nov 07, 2013 at 11:21:15PM +0100, Tobi wrote:
Copy the *SAME* config file to different machines and try:
$ postmap -q '192.167.34.21' mysql:/path/to/config-file
Are the results different?
Yes they are. On the two other machines the file works
root@mail1:~# postmap -q
Hi
http://www.postfix.org/TLS_README.html#server_tls
am i overlooking something or is it not possible to list explcit
offered ciphers and their order like dovecot/httpd fro smtpd?
i am speaking here about non-MX servers only for submission
what i most appreciate in this way of configuration is
On Thu, Nov 07, 2013 at 11:31:03PM +0100, li...@rhsoft.net wrote:
http://www.postfix.org/TLS_README.html#server_tls
Am I overlooking something or is it not possible to list explicit
offered ciphers and their order like dovecot/httpd for smtpd?
Postfix provides a more natural user interface
Am 07.11.2013 23:26, schrieb Viktor Dukhovni:
On Thu, Nov 07, 2013 at 11:21:15PM +0100, Tobi wrote:
Copy the *SAME* config file to different machines and try:
$ postmap -q '192.167.34.21' mysql:/path/to/config-file
Are the results different?
Yes they are. On the two other machines the file
On Thu, Nov 07, 2013 at 11:46:43PM +0100, Tobi wrote:
If the ip/port are different, it is not the *SAME* configuration.
I know but it's not possible otherwise. The two other server reach
the mysql-cluster via other ips/ports.
Do double-check that 3rd configuration file, make sure it contains
On 11/07/2013 08:43 AM, Matthew Brown wrote:
Hi all,
I’m trying to integrate dspam into my mail flow and have got some conflict
configuration suggestions.
Regarding on incoming mail what are the advantages of using dspam as a content
filter (and then reinjecting into postfix)[1] vs postfix
thank you for your feedback
Am 07.11.2013 23:45, schrieb Viktor Dukhovni:
Postfix provides a more natural user interface in terms of cipher
grades (null, export, low, medium, high). These have sensibly easy
to reason about security properties.
I've seen many subtle and not so-subtle errors
I am looking to load balance and distribute outgoing load.
I read that all you need to do is add the following dns entries for
each postfix box..
mxr IN A 192.168.1.121
mxr IN A 192.168.1.131
mxr IN A 192.168.1.141
mxr IN A 192.168.1.151
mxr IN A 192.168.1.161
and the following line in main.cf
On Fri, Nov 08, 2013 at 12:27:13AM +0100, li...@rhsoft.net wrote:
If you MUST muck around with raw OpenSSL cipherlists, the underlying
tls_grade_cipherlist
parameters are present and documented, along with appropriate
warnings to not go there.
Note that Postfix will still
Am 08.11.2013 00:50, schrieb Viktor Dukhovni:
On Fri, Nov 08, 2013 at 12:27:13AM +0100, li...@rhsoft.net wrote:
If you MUST muck around with raw OpenSSL cipherlists, the underlying
tls_grade_cipherlist
parameters are present and documented, along with appropriate
warnings to not go
On 11/7/2013 5:53 AM, Simon Loewenthal wrote:
Damned chroot now turned off, and lookups now work like they should have
done :D
The default Postfix chroot environment in Debian 6 Squeeze works fine
out of the box, as did Lenny. You have to go back to Etch or Sarge to
find it broken. I'd
Roman Gelfand skrev den 2013-11-08 00:46:
I am looking to load balance and distribute outgoing load.
no point
I read that all you need to do is add the following dns entries for
each postfix box..
link ?
mxr IN A 192.168.1.121
mxr IN A 192.168.1.131
mxr IN A 192.168.1.141
mxr IN A
On Fri, Nov 08, 2013 at 01:05:33AM +0100, li...@rhsoft.net wrote:
Note that Postfix will still apply implicit and configured exclusions
to these based on context (!aNULL when verifying peer certificates)
READ THE ABOVE Note carefully. The exclusions are applied on
top of the cipher
Roman Gelfand:
I am looking to load balance and distribute outgoing load.
I read that all you need to do is add the following dns entries for
each postfix box..
mxr IN A 192.168.1.121
mxr IN A 192.168.1.131
mxr IN A 192.168.1.141
mxr IN A 192.168.1.151
mxr IN A 192.168.1.161
and the
thank you very much for all that informations
i will add this message to my documentation archive and have a look
how hard it is really needed to tweak here - also saw consumer grade
routers breaking TLS until restart them
somehow i do not expect that Outllok 2010 on Windows 8 has more problems
Wouldn't the server be chosen round robin as opposed to random?
From: Wietse Venema
Sent: 11/7/2013 8:21 PM
To: Postfix users
Cc: postfix users list; u...@porcupine.org
Subject: Re: Multiple outgoing smtp servers
Roman Gelfand:
I am looking to load balance and distribute outgoing load.
I read
On Fri, Nov 08, 2013 at 01:17:54AM +, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
With smtpd(8) there are no implicit exclusions so you can build the
full list yourself if you want. For example with opportunistic TLS
(may):
One minor correction, with either of:
smtpd_tls_ask_ccert = yes
On 11/7/2013 7:52 PM, Roman Gelfand wrote:
Wouldn't the server be chosen round robin as opposed to random?
This would require too much complex code for what is a simple Postfix
operation. Your example is poor man's round robin. That's the best
Postfix can do without serious code changes. But
On Thu, Nov 07, 2013 at 08:58:47PM -0600, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
On 11/7/2013 7:52 PM, Roman Gelfand wrote:
Wouldn't the server be chosen round robin as opposed to random?
This would require too much complex code for what is a simple Postfix
operation. Your example is poor man's round
42 matches
Mail list logo
