Re: postfix [was Re: Sendmail vs Exim vs Others]
Hello. I'd like to help! ... not a clue if this fits your requirements or whether it is indeed helpful. (Its meant to be my benefit to the group, rather of awaiting replies to my own inquiries ...) I use following setup in postfix, which I think is much greater then exim. (exim and ppp/dialin gave me too much problem I could not cope, also postfix's much easier to setup!) - main.cf - [...] mydestination = csav-3, localhost.localdomain, localhost [...] append_dot_mydomain = no relayhost = smtp.mailhost.net ## any smtp host defer_transports = smtp disable_dns_lookups = yes sender_canonical_maps = hash:/etc/postfix/canonical smtp_sasl_auth_enable = yes smtp_sasl_password_maps = hash:/etc/postfix/sasl_passwd smtp_sasl_security_options = canonicals only entry: --- #user email gerd[EMAIL PROTECTED] last but not least: /etc/postfix/sasl_passwd (only one line) --- ## a bit confused: whole email as passwd like gmx must have / could be also somekind of alphanumerical one, for instance passwd123 smtp.mailhost.net[EMAIL PROTECTED]:fit9084 that's it! you have to rehash the canonical and sas_passwd to have them as true databases workable for postfix. postmap [filename] will do the job. Please I am not sure, if you would ever get to this point beg one else to answer this (long ago I set this up, i forgot) best regards, alex -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: postfix [was Re: Sendmail vs Exim vs Others]
Nano Nano wrote: My first test message to the outside world bounced with: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: host smtp.comcast.net[216.148.227.125] said: 550 [PERMFAIL] comcast.net requires valid sender (in reply to RCPT TO command) exim always added my Sender header for me. I presume comcast is rejecting your email because it doesn't like the hostname given in the HELO/EHLO command. It saying 'comcast.net requires valid sender' sounds like it. What do 'postconf myorigin' and 'postconf myhostname' say? You (or rather comcast) want myorigin to be a hostname that's in the Internet DNS. Tobias -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: postfix [was Re: Sendmail vs Exim vs Others]
On Mon, Feb 02, 2004 at 05:39:54AM +0100, Tobias Reckhard wrote: Nano Nano wrote: My first test message to the outside world bounced with: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: host smtp.comcast.net[216.148.227.125] said: 550 [PERMFAIL] comcast.net requires valid sender (in reply to RCPT TO command) exim always added my Sender header for me. I presume comcast is rejecting your email because it doesn't like the hostname given in the HELO/EHLO command. It saying 'comcast.net requires valid sender' sounds like it. What do 'postconf myorigin' and 'postconf myhostname' say? You (or rather comcast) want myorigin to be a hostname that's in the Internet DNS. # postconf myorigin myorigin = $myhostname # postconf myhostname myhostname = desk Should I just change mail name during postfix debconf questions to comcast.net ?? Mail will then appear to come from [EMAIL PROTECTED] or [EMAIL PROTECTED] which are not real emails. It looks like I need to modify virtual(5) or canonical(5) but I cannot grok the examples from postfix-doc. aliases(5) seems to be okay; it's correctly delivering local root mail to my account. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: postfix [was Re: Sendmail vs Exim vs Others]
Nano Nano wrote: # postconf myorigin myorigin = $myhostname # postconf myhostname myhostname = desk OK. Some hosts will reject your host's HELO/EHLO, but the comcast thing was probably due to your MAIL FROM: address' domain not being in the Internet DNS. Should I just change mail name during postfix debconf questions to comcast.net ?? I don't know, honestly, I always select 'No configuration' and configure it myself, so I don't know what effect the individual debconf answers have. Mail will then appear to come from [EMAIL PROTECTED] or [EMAIL PROTECTED] which are not real emails. I don't know about your setup. If you're just sending emails out with Postfix and not receiving any (from the Internet) and using a smarthost (aka relayhost with Postfix), you only need to make sure you use HELO/EHLO parameters that your relayhost will accept. The domain in your MAIL FROM: address should exist in the Internet DNS, otherwise many sites will reject your emails (or will waste resources when trying to send bounces to you). You should use your email address here. It looks like I need to modify virtual(5) or canonical(5) but I cannot grok the examples from postfix-doc. aliases(5) seems to be okay; it's correctly delivering local root mail to my account. I don't think you want to modify virtual. Canonical perhaps. Explain your setup and what you want to do and maybe we can help. You can also try the postfix-users mailing list. Tobias -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: postfix [was Re: Sendmail vs Exim vs Others]
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED], Nano Nano [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sat, Jan 31, 2004 at 01:21:46AM +0100, Vincent Lefevre wrote: On 2004-01-30 14:57:37 -0800, Nano Nano wrote: Aha, that explains why the 2nd message worked: I have a mutt rule that adds the correct From for list-replies. I guess I'll have to make sure Mutt adds a valid From or Sender in all cases. I'll have to make sure all mail-generating programs do that: is there a facility in Debian to assist with that, or will I need to administer Identities in each MUA individually? Isn't postfix able to do email rewriting? I guess but it apparently doesn't do it OOB. I never liked how Exim leaked my AccountFullName+EtcEmailAddressesEmail identity in the Sender when I was using an alternate valid From email and nickname (like here). You can configure exim not to do that if you don't like it. Mike. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Sendmail vs Exim vs Others
On 2004-01-30, Vincent Lefevre penned: On 2004-01-30 11:03:07 -0700, Monique Y. Herman wrote: On 2004-01-30, Vincent Lefevre penned: But the man page is far from being clear and incomplete (compared to the procmail man pages). Have you looked at `man procmailex`? It has a lot of very clear examples. I was complaining at exim, not procmail. Oh! Sure enough, you were. Clear enough from your text. I don't know where my brain was. In that case, I wholeheartedly agree with you. -- monique -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Sendmail vs Exim vs Others
On Thu, Jan 29, 2004 at 09:40:28PM -0800, Steve Lamb wrote: Adam Aube wrote: My personal preference is qmail. Not sure if it's available in the Debian archive or not, but you can check out www.qmail.org for more info - look for the links to netqmail. Probably not given the nature of its license. Yes and no. There is a qmail-src package which will create a debianized package for installation. qmail, by default, will not relay AT ALL, and I have found it very easy to install and setup. o.O I've had to work with QMail and I have to say that it is one big giant headache. It was last actively developed in a day and age when SMTP could be fairly open. To get any decent security requires that you need to patch in at least 6-7 different patches because the license forbids redistribution of modified source. The qmail-src package applies a few of the more useful patches when it creates the binary package. Compared to my work with Exim QMail is one big giant nightmare. QMail can be quite inflexible at times. I haven't worked with Exim on the same level as QMail yet, but do like what I've seen of Exim so far and am planning on migrating to it in place of QMail In short, QMail is the Windows of MTAs. Sure, you can get it to work but doing so is more trouble than its worth and maintaining it is even worse. That just FUD. It may not be the easiest MTA to work with but the above is just misleading and wrong. -- Jamin W. Collins To be nobody but yourself when the whole world is trying it's best night and day to make you everybody else is to fight the hardest battle any human being will fight. -- E.E. Cummings -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: postfix [was Re: Sendmail vs Exim vs Others]
Hi, * Nano Nano wrote (2004-01-30 07:01): My first test message to the outside world bounced with: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: host smtp.comcast.net[216.148.227.125] said: 550 [PERMFAIL] comcast.net requires valid sender (in reply to RCPT TO command) exim always added my Sender header for me. What to do? What's in the log for this message? Thorsten -- Endorsing products is the American way of expressing individuality. - Calvin pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Sendmail vs Exim vs Others
Adam Aube wrote: I've added patches for various purposes, but not for security. What security problems were you patching against? I consider fundimental checks against spam and viruses to be part and parcel to security. What idiotic ideas? qmail is designed to be secure, fast, and simple - and it achieves those goals quite well. Prime example: Exim logs all activity with a message by a unique identifier assigned to that message. No message passing through Exim will ever have the same identifier. Therefore it is trivial to track down the entire history of a message through any number of logs. QMail assigns the message's INode as the identifier. INodes are reused. Therefore it is a non-trivial matter to track down what a message has gone through since one has to first find the message number, then track that number until a successful delivery attempt is made. Mind you each delivery attempt is given a different identifier as well and has no reference to original identifier! Once a successful delivery attempt is made all future references to that message *may* be invalid. That has been a major thorn in my side for weeks because I cannot perform a simple freakin' grep to get the history of a single message! If I did I'd see it pop up several dozen times as the same INode is reused over and over. Of course logging isn't the only problem with this concept. Try moving the queue. I dare ya! Simplistic design, yes. Simple, as in to use? No way. *BASIC* operations like logging and queue maintenance required tools to be written. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. ---+- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: postfix [was Re: Sendmail vs Exim vs Others]
On Fri, Jan 30, 2004 at 08:19:36AM +0100, Thorsten Haude wrote: What's in the log for this message? from /var/log/mail.log: Jan 29 23:42:00 desk postfix/smtp[4117]: 8AEF514756: to=[EMAIL PROTECTED], relay=smtp.comcast.net[204.127.198.27], delay=0, status=bounced (host smtp.comcast.net[204.127.198.27] said: 550 [PERMFAIL] comcast.net requires valid sender (in reply to RCPT TO command)) Here's the text of the bounced message: Reporting-MTA: dns; desk Arrival-Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2004 23:42:00 -0800 (PST) Final-Recipient: rfc822; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Action: failed Status: 5.0.0 Diagnostic-Code: X-Postfix; host smtp.comcast.net[204.127.198.27] said: 550 [PERMFAIL] comcast.net requires valid sender (in reply to RCPT TO command) // It apparently wants me to add an Sender header. Mutt doesn't do it. Exim always did it for me, using the form: [Account Full Name] email from /etc/email-addresses matching account I never liked that. I need to tell postfix something to say as Sender. How? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Sendmail vs Exim vs Others
On Fri, 30 Jan 2004 17:13:58 +1100 Ian Perry [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Over the weekend, I will 'play'. I just came across this comparison of the four which I found interesting. http://shearer.org/en/writing/mtacomparison.html Procmail is definitely worth looking at. Also clamav, spamassassin, amavis, spamc. Regards, David. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: postfix [was Re: Sendmail vs Exim vs Others]
On Thu, Jan 29, 2004 at 11:52:13PM -0800, Nano Nano wrote: On Fri, Jan 30, 2004 at 08:19:36AM +0100, Thorsten Haude wrote: What's in the log for this message? from /var/log/mail.log: Jan 29 23:42:00 desk postfix/smtp[4117]: 8AEF514756: to=[EMAIL PROTECTED], relay=smtp.comcast.net[204.127.198.27], delay=0, status=bounced (host smtp.comcast.net[204.127.198.27] said: 550 [PERMFAIL] comcast.net requires valid sender (in reply to RCPT TO command)) Strangeness! I sent the message I am replying to via Postfix (before I remembered to switch back to Exim), and it worked. The message I am sending now will be with Exim. Maybe postfix was working okay after all. The message that bounced was: From: Me [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: test Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2004 23:42:00 -0800 User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.5.1+cvs20040105i Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] bleh //end One worked, one didn't. Probably tripped a virus filter with the test message. So I still need to add the Sender automatically with Postfix, and I don't know how. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Sendmail vs Exim vs Others
Jamin W. Collins wrote: That just FUD. It may not be the easiest MTA to work with but the above is just misleading and wrong. Is it? Queue maintenance? Correct me if I'm wrong but is this FUD. Removing a message from Exim's queue: exim -Mrm message-ID Removing a message from qmail's queue: Issue command to shut down qmail. Sometimes wait up to 20m for it to completely shut down. Manually find and delete messages. Run the queue fix utility (which, if memory serves, is not part of the base qmail package by the original author) Start up qmail How about searching the logs for meaningful information on a message? In exim: Grep for the address in the logs and look for the basic timeframe of the message you want to isolate. Copy message ID to the clipboard. Grep for the message ID. In qmail Grep for the address in the logs and look for the basic timeframe of the message you want to isolate. Realize that qmail's timestamps are not meant for mortals so pipe it through tai64nlocal to get meaningful times. Grab the message ID. Grep the logs (remembering to pipe this time) for that message ID to see what comes up. Get a buttload of beginning delivery status messagess for multiple messages since the inode had about 30 messages in it in the past couple of hours. Grab instead the delivery ID of each attempt and grep manually (remembering to pipe this time). In the Exim case if a message had 6 attempted deliveries with 5 deferrals I'd get all of that with the grep on the message ID. I'd know the history of that message. In the QMail case I can't because each delivery is unique and has no tie to the message in any form. The delivery messages don't have either the address in it or the message ID in it. In the several years of using Exim I have done far more perusing of logs and have never seriously gotten outside of grep and less. In the 3 months of using QMail I've given up and written a tool just to do basic searches for email addresses and the associated deliveries. By the same token I find simple queue maintenance of Exim a breeze while qmail is a chore which, again, requires external tools which had to be written by other people just to get simple operations done. Tell me how any of that is FUD and not fact. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. ---+- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Sendmail vs Exim vs Others
On Fri, Jan 30, 2004 at 04:00:49PM +0800, Katipo wrote: On Fri, 30 Jan 2004 17:13:58 +1100 http://shearer.org/en/writing/mtacomparison.html ^^^ Procmail is definitely worth looking at. Also clamav, spamassassin, amavis, spamc. Procmail is an MDA. The others are MTAs. http://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2000/debian-user-28/msg03033.html I've been on this list long enough to here that enough! -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: postfix [was Re: Sendmail vs Exim vs Others]
Moin, * Nano Nano wrote (2004-01-30 08:52): On Fri, Jan 30, 2004 at 08:19:36AM +0100, Thorsten Haude wrote: What's in the log for this message? from /var/log/mail.log: Jan 29 23:42:00 desk postfix/smtp[4117]: 8AEF514756: to=[EMAIL PROTECTED], relay=smtp.comcast.net[204.127.198.27], delay=0, status=bounced (host smtp.comcast.net[204.127.198.27] said: 550 [PERMFAIL] comcast.net requires valid sender (in reply to RCPT TO command)) (Oops.) Don't be so frugal, what are the other entries for this mail? Thorsten -- Every person shall have the right freely to inform himself without hindrance from generally accessible sources. - German Grundgesetz, Article 5, Sec. 1 pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: postfix [was Re: Sendmail vs Exim vs Others]
Moin, * Nano Nano wrote (2004-01-30 08:52): On Fri, Jan 30, 2004 at 08:19:36AM +0100, Thorsten Haude wrote: What's in the log for this message? from /var/log/mail.log: Jan 29 23:42:00 desk postfix/smtp[4117]: 8AEF514756: to=[EMAIL PROTECTED], relay=smtp.comcast.net[204.127.198.27], delay=0, status=bounced (host smtp.comcast.net[204.127.198.27] said: 550 [PERMFAIL] comcast.net requires valid sender (in reply to RCPT TO command)) Nicht so sparsam, wie sehen die anderen Einträge für diese Mail aus? Thorsten -- Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers. - Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, Article 11 pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Sendmail vs Exim vs Others
Lucas Albers wrote: Sendmail does a lot, the milter interface allows you to massage/filter/virus scan email, and reject at the 5xx level. Doing it with Exim as well. *shrug* -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. ---+- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Sendmail vs Exim vs Others
On Thu, 29 Jan 2004 21:40:28 -0800 Steve Lamb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Adam Aube wrote: My personal preference is qmail. Not sure if it's available in the Debian archive or not, but you can check out www.qmail.org for more info - look for the links to netqmail. Probably not given the nature of its license. qmail, by default, will not relay AT ALL, and I have found it very easy to install and setup. o.O I've had to work with QMail and I have to say that it is one big giant headache. It was last actively developed in a day and age when SMTP could be fairly open. To get any decent security requires that you need to patch in at least 6-7 different patches because the license forbids redistribution of modified source. That's unusual. To be honest, I haven't looked at it seriously because it's not free, but everybody I've asked that has had experience with it, says that it is up there with the best as far as security goes. Regards, David. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Sendmail vs Exim vs Others
Katipo wrote: Procmail is definitely worth looking at. Also clamav, spamassassin, amavis, spamc. procmail is largely unneeded with exim. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. ---+- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: postfix [was Re: Sendmail vs Exim vs Others]
On Fri, Jan 30, 2004 at 09:02:25AM +0100, Thorsten Haude wrote: Moin, * Nano Nano wrote (2004-01-30 08:52): On Fri, Jan 30, 2004 at 08:19:36AM +0100, Thorsten Haude wrote: What's in the log for this message? from /var/log/mail.log: Jan 29 23:42:00 desk postfix/smtp[4117]: 8AEF514756: to=[EMAIL PROTECTED], relay=smtp.comcast.net[204.127.198.27], delay=0, status=bounced (host smtp.comcast.net[204.127.198.27] said: 550 [PERMFAIL] comcast.net requires valid sender (in reply to RCPT TO command)) (Oops.) Don't be so frugal, what are the other entries for this mail? Here's some more before and after that entry, starting and ending at Postfix starting/stopping entries (uid and account names obfuscated): Jan 29 21:48:30 desk postfix/postfix-script: starting the Postfix mail system Jan 29 21:48:31 desk postfix/master[1401]: daemon started -- version 2.0.18 Jan 29 21:51:18 desk postfix/postfix-script: fatal: usage: postfix start (or stop, reload, abort, flush, or check) Jan 29 21:51:23 desk postfix/postfix-script: stopping the Postfix mail system Jan 29 21:51:23 desk postfix/master[1401]: terminating on signal 15 Jan 29 21:51:44 desk postfix/postfix-script: starting the Postfix mail system Jan 29 21:51:44 desk postfix/master[1652]: daemon started -- version 2.0.18 Jan 29 21:51:54 desk postfix/postfix-script: stopping the Postfix mail system Jan 29 21:51:54 desk postfix/master[1652]: terminating on signal 15 Jan 29 21:53:21 desk postfix/postfix-script: starting the Postfix mail system Jan 29 21:53:21 desk postfix/master[1848]: daemon started -- version 2.0.18 Jan 29 21:53:43 desk postfix/pickup[1851]: 829D4145BD: uid=[removed] from=[EMAIL PROTECTED] Jan 29 21:53:43 desk postfix/cleanup[1856]: 829D4145BD: message-id=[EMAIL PROTECTED] Jan 29 21:53:43 desk postfix/qmgr[1852]: 829D4145BD: from=[EMAIL PROTECTED], size=1413, nrcpt=1 (queue active) Jan 29 21:53:44 desk postfix/smtp[1858]: 829D4145BD: to=[EMAIL PROTECTED], relay=smtp.comcast.net[204.127.198.27], delay=1, status=sent (250 ok ; id=20040130055345014006d75ne) Jan 29 21:54:23 desk postfix/pickup[1851]: 6A974145CE: uid=[removed] from=[removed] Jan 29 21:54:23 desk postfix/cleanup[1856]: 6A974145CE: message-id=[EMAIL PROTECTED] Jan 29 21:54:23 desk postfix/qmgr[1852]: 6A974145CE: from=[EMAIL PROTECTED], size=382, nrcpt=1 (queue active) Jan 29 21:54:23 desk postfix/local[1869]: 6A974145CE: to=[EMAIL PROTECTED], orig_to=[removed], relay=local, delay=0, status=sent (|procmail -a $EXTENSION) Jan 29 21:54:37 desk postfix/pickup[1851]: E6A93145E1: uid=[removed] from=[removed] Jan 29 21:54:37 desk postfix/cleanup[1856]: E6A93145E1: message-id=[EMAIL PROTECTED] Jan 29 21:54:37 desk postfix/qmgr[1852]: E6A93145E1: from=[EMAIL PROTECTED], size=404, nrcpt=1 (queue active) Jan 29 21:54:38 desk postfix/smtp[1858]: E6A93145E1: to=[EMAIL PROTECTED], relay=smtp.comcast.net[216.148.227.125], delay=1, status=bounced (host smtp.comcast.net[216.148.227.125] said: 550 [PERMFAIL] comcast.net requires valid sender (in reply to RCPT TO command)) Jan 29 21:54:38 desk postfix/cleanup[1856]: 427B5145F6: message-id=[EMAIL PROTECTED] Jan 29 21:54:38 desk postfix/qmgr[1852]: 427B5145F6: from=, size=2047, nrcpt=1 (queue active) Jan 29 21:54:38 desk postfix/local[1869]: 427B5145F6: to=[EMAIL PROTECTED], relay=local, delay=0, status=sent (|procmail -a $EXTENSION) Jan 29 21:55:07 desk postfix/postfix-script: stopping the Postfix mail system Jan 29 21:55:07 desk postfix/master[1848]: terminating on signal 15 Jan 29 21:55:25 desk postfix/postfix-script: starting the Postfix mail system Jan 29 21:55:25 desk postfix/master[2126]: daemon started -- version 2.0.18 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Sendmail vs Exim vs Others
On 29 Jan 2004, Lucas Albers [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in linux.debian.user: I am not sure why you need to upgrade postfix to a newer version from stable? What new wizbang items does it do? I'm sure there is a proper directory to do this in, but I normally make a subdir in /tmp. edit /etc/apt/sources.list so that your deb-src lines say unstable instead of stable apt-get update apt-get build-dep postfix apt-get -b source postfix If everything goes well, you will have bunch of files like postfix_2.0.18-1_i386.deb. Pick the ones you are already using under 1.0 (it should be pretty obvious if you are using mypostfix_2.0.18-1_i386.debsql etc) and install them like this: dpkg -i Couldn't be much easier. I can't believe I stuck with Redhat for so long. -Dan -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]http://www.cutthatout.com Seattle, WA USA I can't spell and I don't care. Fight back against worms and blackhats - http://www.mynetwatchman.com SPAM bait: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: postfix [was Re: Sendmail vs Exim vs Others]
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED], Nano Nano [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, Jan 29, 2004 at 09:53:43PM -0800, Nano Nano wrote: Configuration: Internet with smarthost Append .domain? No Smtp relay host? My ISPs smtp server Final destination domains? default choices ---Force synchronous updates on mail queue? Yes Is that it? Just drop in and go? I did force syncronous updates so I wouldn't ever lose mail. My first test message to the outside world bounced with: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: host smtp.comcast.net[216.148.227.125] said: 550 [PERMFAIL] comcast.net requires valid sender (in reply to RCPT TO command) exim always added my Sender header for me. What to do? It's not the Sender: header. If it refused your message at RCPT TO, it didn't even see the body yet. I bet postfix used an invalid MAIL FROM. Make sure your machine has a valid, existing domain name or that postfix is configured to use a valid, existing domain name as its primary domain (in exim, that's primary_hostname/ qualify_domain - I don't know the postfix equivalent). Mike. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Sendmail vs Exim vs Others
On Friday 30 January 2004 02:59 am, Steve Lamb wrote: Queue maintenance? Correct me if I'm wrong but is this FUD. Removing a message from Exim's queue: exim -Mrm message-ID Removing a message from qmail's queue: Issue command to shut down qmail. Sometimes wait up to 20m for it to completely shut down. Manually find and delete messages. Run the queue fix utility (which, if memory serves, is not part of the base qmail package by the original author) Start up qmail Try downloading qmhandle from qmail.org. It's a Perl script that automates the entire process for you, and you don't have to run queue fix afterwards. The queue fix script is almost never needed unless the admin has been playing around in the queue manually. How about searching the logs for meaningful information on a message? In qmail Grep for the address in the logs and look for the basic timeframe of the message you want to isolate. Realize that qmail's timestamps are not meant for mortals so pipe it through tai64nlocal to get meaningful times. Only if you use multilog (part of daemontools). If you use syslog, then the timestamps are perfectly human-readable. Grab the message ID. Grep the logs (remembering to pipe this time) for that message ID to see what comes up. Get a buttload of beginning delivery status messagess for multiple messages since the inode had about 30 messages in it in the past couple of hours. Grab instead the delivery ID of each attempt and grep manually (remembering to pipe this time). In the several years of using Exim I have done far more perusing of logs and have never seriously gotten outside of grep and less. In the 3 months of using QMail I've given up and written a tool just to do basic searches for email addresses and the associated deliveries. I've never needed anything more than grep or less to search qmail's logs. By the same token I find simple queue maintenance of Exim a breeze while qmail is a chore which, again, requires external tools which had to be written by other people just to get simple operations done. I hardly find it that difficult to download one Perl script. Tell me how any of that is FUD and not fact. If you think it's hard to manage qmail's queue and search its logs, then that's your opionion. The FUD was labelling it the Windows of MTAs without giving any specifics. Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Sendmail vs Exim vs Others
On 2004-01-30 00:08:41 -0800, Steve Lamb wrote: Katipo wrote: Procmail is definitely worth looking at. Also clamav, spamassassin, amavis, spamc. procmail is largely unneeded with exim. Could you explain why? -- Vincent Lefèvre [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Web: http://www.vinc17.org/ - 100% validated (X)HTML - Acorn Risc PC, Yellow Pig 17, Championnat International des Jeux Mathématiques et Logiques, TETRHEX, etc. Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / SPACES project at LORIA -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Sendmail vs Exim vs Others
Vincent Lefevre wrote: Could you explain why? Procmail is an MDA which provides filtering. Exim does not need an MDA and has its own user-level filtering. For example here's the filter for this list: # Debian-user if $h_List-ID: contains debian-user.lists.debian.org then save Mail/debian-user endif -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. ---+- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Sendmail vs Exim vs Others
On 2004-01-30 09:03:28 -0800, Steve Lamb wrote: Exim does not need an MDA and has its own user-level filtering. For example here's the filter for this list: # Debian-user if $h_List-ID: contains debian-user.lists.debian.org then save Mail/debian-user endif But the man page is far from being clear and incomplete (compared to the procmail man pages). First, what is the user configuration file? How can I interface it with getmail so that exim returns with no error only when the mail has been successfully stored to the user's mailbox (or discarded)? Can it add a Lines: header? -- Vincent Lefèvre [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Web: http://www.vinc17.org/ - 100% validated (X)HTML - Acorn Risc PC, Yellow Pig 17, Championnat International des Jeux Mathématiques et Logiques, TETRHEX, etc. Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / SPACES project at LORIA -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Sendmail vs Exim vs Others
On 2004-01-30, Vincent Lefevre penned: On 2004-01-30 09:03:28 -0800, Steve Lamb wrote: Exim does not need an MDA and has its own user-level filtering. For example here's the filter for this list: # Debian-user if $h_List-ID: contains debian-user.lists.debian.org then save Mail/debian-user endif But the man page is far from being clear and incomplete (compared to the procmail man pages). Have you looked at `man procmailex`? It has a lot of very clear examples. Also, have you ever searched the web for procmail? There are roughly a billion tutorials and how-tos out there. I've never figured out exim's rules, though, so maybe it's just a preference thing. -- monique -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Sendmail vs Exim vs Others
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED], Vincent Lefevre [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 2004-01-30 09:03:28 -0800, Steve Lamb wrote: Exim does not need an MDA and has its own user-level filtering. But the man page is far from being clear and incomplete (compared to the procmail man pages). First, what is the user configuration file? How can I interface it with getmail so that exim returns with no error only when the mail has been successfully stored to the user's mailbox (or discarded)? Can it add a Lines: header? See http://www.exim.org/ . Click on Documentation and FAQs. The same documentation is available as a text file in /usr/share/doc/exim (spec.txt and filter.txt). Mike. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Sendmail vs Exim vs Others
On Fri, Jan 30, 2004 at 06:36:44PM +0100, Vincent Lefevre wrote: On 2004-01-30 09:03:28 -0800, Steve Lamb wrote: Exim does not need an MDA and has its own user-level filtering. For example here's the filter for this list: # Debian-user if $h_List-ID: contains debian-user.lists.debian.org then save Mail/debian-user endif But the man page is far from being clear and incomplete (compared to the procmail man pages). man eximhas little info about the exim filters. man -k exim does not show anything about filters. So do this: ~$ zless /usr/share/doc/exim/filter.txt.gz -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: postfix [was Re: Sendmail vs Exim vs Others]
Hi, * Nano Nano wrote (2004-01-30 09:16): Jan 29 21:54:37 desk postfix/pickup[1851]: E6A93145E1: uid=[removed] from=[removed] Jan 29 21:54:37 desk postfix/cleanup[1856]: E6A93145E1: message-id=[EMAIL PROTECTED] Jan 29 21:54:37 desk postfix/qmgr[1852]: E6A93145E1: from=[EMAIL PROTECTED], size=404, nrcpt=1 (queue active) Jan 29 21:54:38 desk postfix/smtp[1858]: E6A93145E1: to=[EMAIL PROTECTED], relay=smtp.comcast.net[216.148.227.125], delay=1, status=bounced (host smtp.comcast.net[216.148.227.125] said: 550 [PERMFAIL] comcast.net requires valid sender (in reply to RCPT TO command)) I deliver my mails with a valid from address, which [EMAIL PROTECTED] is not. Maybe you should fix your MUA? Thorsten -- Getting a thrill out of some stupid quote is a sign of idiocy. - turmeric pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: postfix [was Re: Sendmail vs Exim vs Others]
On Fri, Jan 30, 2004 at 10:28:43PM +0100, Thorsten Haude wrote: I deliver my mails with a valid from address, which [EMAIL PROTECTED] is not. Maybe you should fix your MUA? Aha, that explains why the 2nd message worked: I have a mutt rule that adds the correct From for list-replies. I guess I'll have to make sure Mutt adds a valid From or Sender in all cases. I'll have to make sure all mail-generating programs do that: is there a facility in Debian to assist with that, or will I need to administer Identities in each MUA individually? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Sendmail vs Exim vs Others
On 2004-01-30 11:03:07 -0700, Monique Y. Herman wrote: On 2004-01-30, Vincent Lefevre penned: But the man page is far from being clear and incomplete (compared to the procmail man pages). Have you looked at `man procmailex`? It has a lot of very clear examples. I was complaining at exim, not procmail. -- Vincent Lefèvre [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Web: http://www.vinc17.org/ - 100% validated (X)HTML - Acorn Risc PC, Yellow Pig 17, Championnat International des Jeux Mathématiques et Logiques, TETRHEX, etc. Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / SPACES project at LORIA -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: postfix [was Re: Sendmail vs Exim vs Others]
On 2004-01-30 14:57:37 -0800, Nano Nano wrote: Aha, that explains why the 2nd message worked: I have a mutt rule that adds the correct From for list-replies. I guess I'll have to make sure Mutt adds a valid From or Sender in all cases. I'll have to make sure all mail-generating programs do that: is there a facility in Debian to assist with that, or will I need to administer Identities in each MUA individually? Isn't postfix able to do email rewriting? -- Vincent Lefèvre [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Web: http://www.vinc17.org/ - 100% validated (X)HTML - Acorn Risc PC, Yellow Pig 17, Championnat International des Jeux Mathématiques et Logiques, TETRHEX, etc. Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / SPACES project at LORIA -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: postfix [was Re: Sendmail vs Exim vs Others]
On Sat, Jan 31, 2004 at 01:21:46AM +0100, Vincent Lefevre wrote: On 2004-01-30 14:57:37 -0800, Nano Nano wrote: Aha, that explains why the 2nd message worked: I have a mutt rule that adds the correct From for list-replies. I guess I'll have to make sure Mutt adds a valid From or Sender in all cases. I'll have to make sure all mail-generating programs do that: is there a facility in Debian to assist with that, or will I need to administer Identities in each MUA individually? Isn't postfix able to do email rewriting? I guess but it apparently doesn't do it OOB. I never liked how Exim leaked my AccountFullName+EtcEmailAddressesEmail identity in the Sender when I was using an alternate valid From email and nickname (like here). So I like the idea of doing it in the MUA but I would still like some standarization or central management. Probably can't have both. I'm crawling forward. At least I'm aware of the issues. BTW, I realized if you purge Exim's configuration, /etc/email-addresses will disappears if you haven't modified it. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Sendmail vs Exim vs Others
Dan Lawrence said: I am not sure why you need to upgrade postfix to a newer version from stable? What new wizbang items does it do? damn just do apt-get -t testing install postfix But I was wondering was thus? Not how to upgrade,but... Why upgrade to the newer version of postfix? -- --Luke CS Sysadmin, Montana State University-Bozeman -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Sendmail vs Exim vs Others
On Thursday 29 January 2004 11:50 pm, Ian Perry wrote: I know this question is subjective to personal preferences Is there an advantage to exim over sendmail or vice versa for ease of setup/maintenance etc ? I would be interested in comments from those who have used both. Is there something better than either of them ? My personal preference is qmail. Not sure if it's available in the Debian archive or not, but you can check out www.qmail.org for more info - look for the links to netqmail. I also know that many people are happy with Postfix (which is in the Debian archive). I have no experience with it. I have very little experience with either of them, and have found nothing in the archives on the subject. I need something extremely simple to simply send and receive mail, but not to be an open relay. qmail, by default, will not relay AT ALL, and I have found it very easy to install and setup. Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Sendmail vs Exim vs Others
On Fri, 30 Jan 2004 15:50:54 +1100 Ian Perry [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, I know this question is subjective to personal preferences Is there an advantage to exim over sendmail or vice versa for ease of setup/maintenance etc ? I would be interested in comments from those who have used both. Is there something better than either of them ? I have very little experience with either of them, and have found nothing in the archives on the subject. I need something extremely simple to simply send and receive mail, but not to be an open relay. I have been to both exim and sendmail websites and both 'seem' to do pretty much the same job and can get as complex as you want. Ian Exim is better than sendmail, apparently it has so many holes even the creator of the programme has found other work, writing for eweek, or some such. Exim may take a little bit of research, as I understand it, some of the packages suitable for exim3 still have to be upgraded for exim4, or exim4 Heavy. But that shouldn't be too long in happening. Regards, David. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Sendmail vs Exim vs Others
Ian Perry wrote: I know this question is subjective to personal preferences Is there an advantage to exim over sendmail or vice versa for ease of setup/maintenance etc ? I would be interested in comments from those who have used both. Sendmail - so difficult to configure the configuration language needs a macro language to make sense of it. Exim - so easy to configure that in most cases you can do it with the comments in the config file. That's where the comperison ends for me. I've never found a need for sendmail in the modern 'net populated with Postfix and Exim. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. ---+- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Sendmail vs Exim vs Others
Ian Perry wrote: I know this question is subjective to personal preferences Is there an advantage to exim over sendmail or vice versa for ease of setup/maintenance etc ? I would be interested in comments from those who have used both. sendmail is probably more difficult. Is there something better than either of them ? Define 'better'. I have very little experience with either of them, and have found nothing in the archives on the subject. I need something extremely simple to simply send and receive mail, but not to be an open relay. I have been to both exim and sendmail websites and both 'seem' to do pretty much the same job and can get as complex as you want. I'll throw postfix into the ring. It's very secure and still very flexible. You may want to use a more recent version than the one in woody, though, but a backport is available on http://www.backports.org. Cheers, Tobias -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Sendmail vs Exim vs Others
Adam Aube wrote: My personal preference is qmail. Not sure if it's available in the Debian archive or not, but you can check out www.qmail.org for more info - look for the links to netqmail. Probably not given the nature of its license. qmail, by default, will not relay AT ALL, and I have found it very easy to install and setup. o.O I've had to work with QMail and I have to say that it is one big giant headache. It was last actively developed in a day and age when SMTP could be fairly open. To get any decent security requires that you need to patch in at least 6-7 different patches because the license forbids redistribution of modified source. Speaking of the source every single person I've ever heard look at it thinks it is atrociously written and hates working on it. Fo some reason I believe them because of the atrocious logging that it does as well as the idiotic ideas which are ingrained into the system. Compared to my work with Exim QMail is one big giant nightmare. In short, QMail is the Windows of MTAs. Sure, you can get it to work but doing so is more trouble than its worth and maintaining it is even worse. -- Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | main connection to the switchboard of souls. ---+- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Sendmail vs Exim vs Others
On Thu, Jan 29, 2004 at 09:36:22PM -0800, Steve Lamb wrote: That's where the comperison ends for me. I've never found a need for sendmail in the modern 'net populated with Postfix and Exim. Well, i just bit the bullet: I installed postfix-tls on Sid. Up till now I just answer the questions during Woody install for smarthost system. Postfix-tls asked me the same questions and I answered them the same way (I think). It also removed exim. Configuration: Internet with smarthost Append .domain? No Smtp relay host? My ISPs smtp server Final destination domains? default choices ---Force synchronous updates on mail queue? Yes Is that it? Just drop in and go? I did force syncronous updates so I wouldn't ever lose mail. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Sendmail vs Exim vs Others
On Friday 30 January 2004 12:40 am, Steve Lamb wrote: qmail, by default, will not relay AT ALL, and I have found it very easy to install and setup. o.O I've had to work with QMail and I have to say that it is one big giant headache. I disagree, but we are each entitled to our opinions. To get any decent security requires that you need to patch in at least 6-7 different patches because the license forbids redistribution of modified source. I've added patches for various purposes, but not for security. What security problems were you patching against? Speaking of the source every single person I've ever heard look at it thinks it is atrociously written and hates working on it. Fo some reason I believe them because of the atrocious logging that it does as well as the idiotic ideas which are ingrained into the system. What idiotic ideas? qmail is designed to be secure, fast, and simple - and it achieves those goals quite well. It does show its age, though - many features common to other MTAs are missing and need to be patched in. That's the only real complaint I have about it, and it's only a hassle at installation time. At the same time, qmail's flexibility (due to its modular design) has allowed me to do things I don't think I could do with other MTAs. In short, QMail is the Windows of MTAs. No, I think Sendmail holds that title, and probably will for the forseeable future. Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
postfix [was Re: Sendmail vs Exim vs Others]
On Thu, Jan 29, 2004 at 09:53:43PM -0800, Nano Nano wrote: Configuration: Internet with smarthost Append .domain? No Smtp relay host? My ISPs smtp server Final destination domains? default choices ---Force synchronous updates on mail queue? Yes Is that it? Just drop in and go? I did force syncronous updates so I wouldn't ever lose mail. My first test message to the outside world bounced with: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: host smtp.comcast.net[216.148.227.125] said: 550 [PERMFAIL] comcast.net requires valid sender (in reply to RCPT TO command) exim always added my Sender header for me. What to do? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Sendmail vs Exim vs Others
At 2004-01-30T05:11:23Z, Adam Aube [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Not sure if it's available in the Debian archive or not, It's in non-free. qmail isn't free software. -- Kirk Strauser In Googlis non est, ergo non est. pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
RE: Sendmail vs Exim vs Others
Over the weekend, I will 'play'. I just came across this comparison of the four which I found interesting. http://shearer.org/en/writing/mtacomparison.html -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Sendmail vs Exim vs Others
Steve Lamb said: Sendmail - so difficult to configure the configuration language needs a macro language to make sense of it. Exim - so easy to configure that in most cases you can do it with the comments in the config file. That's where the comperison ends for me. I've never found a need for sendmail in the modern 'net populated with Postfix and Exim. Sendmail does a lot, the milter interface allows you to massage/filter/virus scan email, and reject at the 5xx level. With sendmail+mimedefang I can do some amazing things, set some address to send only, filter by any combination of sender,recipient,relay,message name,size,spam score,extension type, number of relay attempts,etc. I use postfix on all my server's clients except for my primary and secondary mail servers. -- --Luke CS Sysadmin, Montana State University-Bozeman -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Sendmail vs Exim vs Others
Tobias Reckhard said: I'll throw postfix into the ring. It's very secure and still very flexible. You may want to use a more recent version than the one in woody, though, but a backport is available on http://www.backports.org. I am not sure why you need to upgrade postfix to a newer version from stable? What new wizbang items does it do? -- --Luke CS Sysadmin, Montana State University-Bozeman -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Sendmail vs Exim vs Others
On 29 Jan 2004, Ian Perry [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in linux.debian.user: I know this question is subjective to personal preferences Is there an advantage to exim over sendmail or vice versa for ease of setup/maintenance etc ? I would be interested in comments from those who have used both. Is there something better than either of them ? I've used sendmail when I was new with a Redhat install. I switched to postfix largely because it was essentially a drop in replacement for sendmail (only half true, you still need to learn the config files, but there is good documentation in the config files). When I recently switched to debian, I stuck with postfix. One of my favorite things about debian is how easy it was to replace exim (the distribution default mailer) with postfix: apt-get install postfix exim- the postfix installer asks you a few questions and its up and running. If you are using woody, I would suggest you go with a newer version. 2.18-1 is in testing and compiles pretty easily. The two things I like the most about postfix is it's still seeing new features and it is very robust. There are developer snapshots (which the author uses every day in his production environment) if you want to try out the newer features (like greylisting and automatic connection dynamic limiting which they are calling anvil. With the recent outbreak of MyDoom, I've been hearing very good reports about postfix dealing with very heavy loads. One person in the postfix mailing list reported receiving (and rejecting) more then 2 million MyDoom payloads in 1 day. That's more performance then I will ever need here at home :) -Dan -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]http://www.cutthatout.com Seattle, WA USA I can't spell and I don't care. Fight back against worms and blackhats - http://www.mynetwatchman.com SPAM bait: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
