RE: Mails time before queue manager
Mar 20 10:06:59 smtp2 postfix/smtpd[9007]: 25142124292D: client=mm3. oursmtpmail.com[xx.xx.xx.xx], sasl_method=LOGIN, sasl_username=2smtp Mar 20 10:06:59 smtp2 postfix/cleanup[10918]: 25142124292D: message-id=20140320140659.25142124292D@smtp2. oursmtpmail.com Mar 20 10:19:52 smtp2 postfix/qmgr[7470]: 25142124292D: from=uemlmm1_87001230297...@oursmtpmail.com, size=58126, nrcpt=1 (queue active) Mar 20 10:43:55 smtp2 postfix/smtp[13548]: 25142124292D: to=s...@gmail.net, relay=aspmx.l.google.com[74.125.142.26]:25, delay=2217, delays=775/1441/0.14/1.4, dsn=2.0.0, status=sent (250 2.0.0 OK 1395326635 ac8si2519638icc.108 - gsmtp) Mar 20 10:43:55 smtp2 postfix/qmgr[7470]: 25142124292D: removed -Original Message- From: owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org [mailto:owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org] On Behalf Of Wietse Venema Sent: Thursday, March 20, 2014 9:51 PM To: Postfix users Subject: Re: Mails time before queue manager KK Patnaik: I am having issue with my SMTP servers where the mails are taking long time before the queue manager. Mar 20 10:43:55 smtp2 postfix/smtp[13548]: 25142124292D: to=s...@gmail.net, relay=aspmx.l.google.com[74.125.142.26]:25, delay=29217, delays=29775/1441/0.14/1.4, dsn=2.0.0, status=sent (250 2.0.0 OK 1395326635 ac8si2519638icc.108 - gsmtp What is the output from: $ grep 25142124292D /the/maillog/file Wietse
Re: Mails time before queue manager
KK Patnaik: Mar 20 10:43:55 smtp2 postfix/smtp[13548]: 25142124292D: to=s...@gmail.net, relay=aspmx.l.google.com[74.125.142.26]:25, delay=29217, delays=29775/1441/0.14/1.4, dsn=2.0.0, status=sent (250 2.0.0 OK 1395326635 ac8si2519638icc.108 - gsmtp Here, the message is in the queue for 29217 seconds. Wietse: What is the output from: $ grep 25142124292D /the/maillog/file KK Patnaik: Mar 20 10:06:59 smtp2 postfix/smtpd[9007]: 25142124292D: client=mm3. oursmtpmail.com[xx.xx.xx.xx], sasl_method=LOGIN, sasl_username=2smtp ... Mar 20 10:43:55 smtp2 postfix/smtp[13548]: 25142124292D: to=s...@gmail.net, relay=aspmx.l.google.com[74.125.142.26]:25, delay=2217, delays=775/1441/0.14/1.4, dsn=2.0.0, status=sent (250 2.0.0 OK 1395326635 ac8si2519638icc.108 - gsmtp) This message has been in the queue for 2217 seconds, which is consistent with arrival at 10:06:59 and delivery at 10:43:55. Why did you report (see top of this message) that this message was queued for 29217 seconds? Wietse
RE: Mails time before queue manager
Most of the messages are staying in the queue for such long time and that is delaying the delivery of the mail to the recipient. -Original Message- From: owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org [mailto:owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org] On Behalf Of Wietse Venema Sent: Friday, March 21, 2014 5:18 PM To: Postfix users Subject: Re: Mails time before queue manager KK Patnaik: Mar 20 10:43:55 smtp2 postfix/smtp[13548]: 25142124292D: to=s...@gmail.net, relay=aspmx.l.google.com[74.125.142.26]:25, delay=29217, delays=29775/1441/0.14/1.4, dsn=2.0.0, status=sent (250 2.0.0 OK 1395326635 ac8si2519638icc.108 - gsmtp Here, the message is in the queue for 29217 seconds. Wietse: What is the output from: $ grep 25142124292D /the/maillog/file KK Patnaik: Mar 20 10:06:59 smtp2 postfix/smtpd[9007]: 25142124292D: client=mm3. oursmtpmail.com[xx.xx.xx.xx], sasl_method=LOGIN, sasl_username=2smtp ... Mar 20 10:43:55 smtp2 postfix/smtp[13548]: 25142124292D: to=s...@gmail.net, relay=aspmx.l.google.com[74.125.142.26]:25, delay=2217, delays=775/1441/0.14/1.4, dsn=2.0.0, status=sent (250 2.0.0 OK 1395326635 ac8si2519638icc.108 - gsmtp) This message has been in the queue for 2217 seconds, which is consistent with arrival at 10:06:59 and delivery at 10:43:55. Why did you report (see top of this message) that this message was queued for 29217 seconds? Wietse
A strange issue with postfix and altermime - redux
Well, I sent the message though, with altermime enabled, and it chopped
it off.
I've disabled it to send this message.
Nick
Original Message
Message-ID: 532c4b17.2020...@krescendo.com
Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2014 14:22:15 +
From: Nick Warr nick.w...@krescendo.com
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/24.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: postfix-users@postfix.org
Subject:A strange issue with postfix and altermime
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
I am running a CentOS 6.3 server with postfix 2.6 and altermime 0.3.10.
I use altermime to append disclaimers to emails submitted by my users
through port port 587, and 99.95% of the time it works without issue,
recently we've had a few issues with messages sent from Mac Outlook
clients, the issue is definitely related to altermime, if I disable the
filter script, the problem no longer occurs.
The issue is due to what is fortunately a fairly rare occurence, in the
body text, there is a sentence exactly 76 characters long, including
spaces, and as many sentences do, it finishes with a period, but since
the period is the 77th character, it gets bumped down to the next line
(and an = gets appended to the end of the sentence). Here is what it
looks like, with names obscured, if it goes through the server with the
altermime disclaimer disabled.
This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.
--B_3478240988_27375889
Content-type: text/plain;
charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable
Hi XX,
This is definitely the remains of the EQCallTracker API integration since w=
e
originally only supported secondary allocations for the EQCallTracker teams=
.
I assume it would be easy enough to change this though, with a small
enhancement.
Kind Regards
X.
From: X X .xx...@krescendo.com
Date: Thursday, 20 March 2014 16:58
To: XX xxx.x...@.com
Cc: 'XX, XXXx XXX' .x...@.com, ConQuest Dev
conquest...@krescendo.com
Subject: RE: Call API question: handling of Secondary Allocation parameter=
s
Hi X,
=20
Unfortunately no, there aren=B9t =B3hidden=B2 parameters for secondary
allocation
level/group.
For the secondary allocation, the level is always defaulted to L2 and the
group to N/A.
=20
Regards,
There are about three quoted messages underneath that, but I just lopped
them off.
This is what happens when the disclaimer is enabled;
This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.
--B_3478241259_27341821
Content-type: text/plain;
charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable
Hi XX,
This is definitely the remains of the EQCallTracker API integration since w=
e
originally only supported secondary allocations for the EQCallTracker teams=
--B_3478241259_27341821--
As you can see, either postfix or altermime is seeing the period by
itself as a terminator of the SMTP conversation, at least for that
section. I'm fairly sure it's altermime's fault (though through pipe or
when it re-injects the message to postfix, I don't know), and as it's a
rather rare occurence, I'm hesitant to play with the entry in master.cf,
I'm thinking that the EOL setting, or a flag might make a difference,
but I thought asking first might be prudent.
This is the entry in master.cf
dfilt unix- n n - - pipe
flags=Rq user=filter argv=/etc/postfix/disclaimer -f ${sender} --
${recipient}
Any advice or recommendations?
Thanks, Nick
completed: delivery status (and text) filter
The Postfix delivery status filter support is complete as of postfix-2.12-20140321. This can replace the delivery status codes and explanatory text of successful or unsuccessful deliveries by Postfix mail delivery agents. It was originally implemented for sites that want to turn certain SMTP client soft delivery errors into hard delivery errors, but it can also be used to censor out local information from delivery confirmation reports. Below is text from the RELEASE_NOTES with examples. Wietse This feature is implemented as a filter that replaces the three-number enhanced status code and descriptive text in Postfix delivery agent success, bounce, or defer messages. Note: this will not override soft_bounce=yes, and this will not change a successful delivery status into an unsuccessful status or vice versa. The first example turns specific soft TLS errors into hard errors, by overriding the first number in the enhanced status code. /etc/postfix/main.cf: smtp_delivery_status_filter = pcre:/etc/postfix/smtp_dsn_filter /etc/postfix/smtp_dsn_filter: /^4(\.\d+\.\d+ TLS is required, but host \S+ refused to start TLS: .+)/ 5$1 /^4(\.\d+\.\d+ TLS is required, but was not offered by host .+)/ 5$1 The second example removes the destination command name and file name from local(8) successful delivery reports, so that they will not be reported when a sender requests confirmation of delivery. /etc/postfix/main.cf: local_delivery_status_filter = pcre:/etc/postfix/local_dsn_filter /etc/postfix/local_dsn_filter: /^(2\S+ delivered to file).+/$1 /^(2\S+ delivered to command).+/ $1 This feature is supported in the lmtp(8), local(8), pipe(8), smtp(8) and virtual(8) delivery agents. That is, all delivery agents that actually deliver mail. The new main.cf parameters and default values are: default_delivery_status_filter = lmtp_delivery_status_filter = $default_delivery_status_filter local_delivery_status_filter = $default_delivery_status_filter pipe_delivery_status_filter = $default_delivery_status_filter smtp_delivery_status_filter = $default_delivery_status_filter virtual_delivery_status_filter = $default_delivery_status_filter See the postconf(5) manpage for more details.
Re: Mails time before queue manager
KK Patnaik: Most of the messages are staying in the queue for such long time and that is delaying the delivery of the mail to the recipient. So you just added 29 thousand seconds of delay by hand. You just wasted my time with false evidence. Goodbye. Wietse -Original Message- From: owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org [mailto:owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org] On Behalf Of Wietse Venema Sent: Friday, March 21, 2014 5:18 PM To: Postfix users Subject: Re: Mails time before queue manager KK Patnaik: Mar 20 10:43:55 smtp2 postfix/smtp[13548]: 25142124292D: to=s...@gmail.net, relay=aspmx.l.google.com[74.125.142.26]:25, delay=29217, delays=29775/1441/0.14/1.4, dsn=2.0.0, status=sent (250 2.0.0 OK 1395326635 ac8si2519638icc.108 - gsmtp Here, the message is in the queue for 29217 seconds. Wietse: What is the output from: $ grep 25142124292D /the/maillog/file KK Patnaik: Mar 20 10:06:59 smtp2 postfix/smtpd[9007]: 25142124292D: client=mm3. oursmtpmail.com[xx.xx.xx.xx], sasl_method=LOGIN, sasl_username=2smtp ... Mar 20 10:43:55 smtp2 postfix/smtp[13548]: 25142124292D: to=s...@gmail.net, relay=aspmx.l.google.com[74.125.142.26]:25, delay=2217, delays=775/1441/0.14/1.4, dsn=2.0.0, status=sent (250 2.0.0 OK 1395326635 ac8si2519638icc.108 - gsmtp) This message has been in the queue for 2217 seconds, which is consistent with arrival at 10:06:59 and delivery at 10:43:55. Why did you report (see top of this message) that this message was queued for 29217 seconds? Wietse
Problem with TLS and multiple emails over same connection
Hello, I am trying to accomplish a connection cache for TLS. I set it up for non - TLS connections and it works just great. Then i tried to look at the TLS connections. First i enabled the session cache with smtpd_tls_session_cache_database, that works great as well. The problem is, that each email to same destination is sent via new connection. I also am aware of limitation of connection cache which says The Postfix shared connection cache cannot be used with TLS, because saved TLS session information can be used only when a new connection is created (this limitation does not exist in connection caching implementations that reuse a connection only in the process that creates it). For this reason, the Postfix smtp(8) client always closes the connection after completing an attempt to deliver mail over TLS. but the part in the brackets makes me wonder for a possibility, that if i keep sending emails over same smtp process, it could be possible. I looked everywhere, but was not able to find anything remotely helpful. Could anyone point me to right direction ? Thanks you and best regards
Re: Problem with TLS and multiple emails over same connection
On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 03:50:24PM +0100, Stefan Moravcik wrote: I am trying to accomplish a connection cache for TLS. I set it up for non - TLS connections and it works just great. The Postfix connection cache moves file descriptors between processes. Unfortunately, the OpenSSL library does not support serializing and de-serializing the SSL state of a live SSL connection. So at this time, TLS connections are not cached. but the part in the brackets makes me wonder for a possibility, that if i keep sending emails over same smtp process, it could be possible. I looked everywhere, but was not able to find anything remotely helpful. There is no cache internal to a single process. That would only work well with single-destination smtp transports. Otherwise, there would be lots of cached connections that never get used, because the delivery agent is talking to someone else. Since in-process caches would be most-likely misunderstood and misused, they are not implemented. -- Viktor.
Re: A strange issue with postfix and altermime - redux
On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 02:24:49PM +, Nick Warr wrote:
This is the entry in master.cf
dfilt unix- n n - - pipe
flags=Rq user=filter argv=/etc/postfix/disclaimer -f ${sender} --
${recipient}
Any advice or recommendations?
Edit the filter script, and make sure it invokes the sendmail(1)
command with a -i option and (as should be already the case)
without any -t option.
sendmail -i -f $sender -- $@
if the argument list is simply copied from the arguments to
disclaimer, add a -i before -f.
--
Viktor.
Re: A strange issue with postfix and altermime - redux
On 21/03/2014 16:54, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 02:24:49PM +, Nick Warr wrote:
This is the entry in master.cf
dfilt unix- n n - - pipe
flags=Rq user=filter argv=/etc/postfix/disclaimer -f ${sender} --
${recipient}
Any advice or recommendations?
Edit the filter script, and make sure it invokes the sendmail(1)
command with a -i option and (as should be already the case)
without any -t option.
sendmail -i -f $sender -- $@
if the argument list is simply copied from the arguments to
disclaimer, add a -i before -f.
I just had to add in -i,
From
$SENDMAIL $@ in.$$
to
$SENDMAIL -i $@ in.$$
Thank you!
Nick
__
This email is confidential and subject to Krescendo's Email Usage and
Information Classification Policies.
Re: A strange issue with postfix and altermime - redux
Nick Warr:
On 21/03/2014 16:54, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 02:24:49PM +, Nick Warr wrote:
This is the entry in master.cf
dfilt unix- n n - - pipe
flags=Rq user=filter argv=/etc/postfix/disclaimer -f ${sender} --
${recipient}
Any advice or recommendations?
Edit the filter script, and make sure it invokes the sendmail(1)
command with a -i option and (as should be already the case)
without any -t option.
sendmail -i -f $sender -- $@
if the argument list is simply copied from the arguments to
disclaimer, add a -i before -f.
I just had to add in -i,
From
$SENDMAIL $@ in.$$
to
$SENDMAIL -i $@ in.$$
The Postfix FILTER_README instructions have:
SENDMAIL=/usr/sbin/sendmail -G -i # NEVER NEVER NEVER use -t here.
Wietse
Re: A strange issue with postfix and altermime - redux
On 21/03/2014 17:25, Wietse Venema wrote:
Nick Warr:
On 21/03/2014 16:54, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 02:24:49PM +, Nick Warr wrote:
This is the entry in master.cf
dfilt unix- n n - - pipe
flags=Rq user=filter argv=/etc/postfix/disclaimer -f ${sender} --
${recipient}
Any advice or recommendations?
Edit the filter script, and make sure it invokes the sendmail(1)
command with a -i option and (as should be already the case)
without any -t option.
sendmail -i -f $sender -- $@
if the argument list is simply copied from the arguments to
disclaimer, add a -i before -f.
I just had to add in -i,
From
$SENDMAIL $@ in.$$
to
$SENDMAIL -i $@ in.$$
The Postfix FILTER_README instructions have:
SENDMAIL=/usr/sbin/sendmail -G -i # NEVER NEVER NEVER use -t here.
Wietse
You are correct, my mistake was using a script assembled by someone
else, and assuming they had sanity-checked it.
Nick
__
This email is confidential and subject to Krescendo's Email Usage and
Information Classification Policies.
Sending notification to sender
Hi there and thanks in advance for your help. I wish I could send an automated notification upon receiving emails from a couple of domains. for example, let's assume those domains are hotmail.com and gmail.com. What I need is, everytime my users receive a message from either any...@hotmail.com or any...@gmail.com an automated message is sent to those accounts. Is there anyway I can implement that? Thanks in advance Ignacio
Re: Sending notification to sender
Am 21.03.2014 18:47, schrieb Ignacio Garcia: I wish I could send an automated notification upon receiving emails from a couple of domains. for example, let's assume those domains are hotmail.com and gmail.com. What I need is, everytime my users receive a message from either any...@hotmail.com or any...@gmail.com an automated message is sent to those accounts. Is there anyway I can implement that? not that i know and you should *hardly* avoid doing such things until you can make sure there are no forged senders - you can't do that and so the idea is broken if you seek how to get blacklistet on major sites there are easier ways http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delivery_Status_Notification
Re: Sending notification to sender
Thanks for your reply. This is not a matter of backscatter or similar. This is just for notification purposes that a client of a customer of mine requires. Thanks anyway Ignacio El 21/03/2014 18:52, li...@rhsoft.net escribió: Am 21.03.2014 18:47, schrieb Ignacio Garcia: I wish I could send an automated notification upon receiving emails from a couple of domains. for example, let's assume those domains are hotmail.com and gmail.com. What I need is, everytime my users receive a message from either any...@hotmail.com or any...@gmail.com an automated message is sent to those accounts. Is there anyway I can implement that? not that i know and you should *hardly* avoid doing such things until you can make sure there are no forged senders - you can't do that and so the idea is broken if you seek how to get blacklistet on major sites there are easier ways http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delivery_Status_Notification
Re: Sending notification to sender
Ignacio Garcia: Thanks for your reply. This is not a matter of backscatter or similar. This is just for notification purposes that a client of a customer of mine requires. Is this notification sent to ALL email senders at hotmail, gmail, etc? That would be totally insane. Is this for all recipients on your server(s) or just one? What information should be sent to the sender? Wietse
RE: Mails time before queue manager
No I didn't add anything. There are lot of logs like that in my server. I am just trying to resolve the delay of the emails. Please advise. -Original Message- From: owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org [mailto:owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org] On Behalf Of Wietse Venema Sent: Friday, March 21, 2014 8:06 PM To: Postfix users Subject: Re: Mails time before queue manager KK Patnaik: Most of the messages are staying in the queue for such long time and that is delaying the delivery of the mail to the recipient. So you just added 29 thousand seconds of delay by hand. You just wasted my time with false evidence. Goodbye. Wietse -Original Message- From: owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org [mailto:owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org] On Behalf Of Wietse Venema Sent: Friday, March 21, 2014 5:18 PM To: Postfix users Subject: Re: Mails time before queue manager KK Patnaik: Mar 20 10:43:55 smtp2 postfix/smtp[13548]: 25142124292D: to=s...@gmail.net, relay=aspmx.l.google.com[74.125.142.26]:25, delay=29217, delays=29775/1441/0.14/1.4, dsn=2.0.0, status=sent (250 2.0.0 OK 1395326635 ac8si2519638icc.108 - gsmtp Here, the message is in the queue for 29217 seconds. Wietse: What is the output from: $ grep 25142124292D /the/maillog/file KK Patnaik: Mar 20 10:06:59 smtp2 postfix/smtpd[9007]: 25142124292D: client=mm3. oursmtpmail.com[xx.xx.xx.xx], sasl_method=LOGIN, sasl_username=2smtp ... Mar 20 10:43:55 smtp2 postfix/smtp[13548]: 25142124292D: to=s...@gmail.net, relay=aspmx.l.google.com[74.125.142.26]:25, delay=2217, delays=775/1441/0.14/1.4, dsn=2.0.0, status=sent (250 2.0.0 OK 1395326635 ac8si2519638icc.108 - gsmtp) This message has been in the queue for 2217 seconds, which is consistent with arrival at 10:06:59 and delivery at 10:43:55. Why did you report (see top of this message) that this message was queued for 29217 seconds? Wietse
Re: Sending notification to sender
Am 21.03.2014 18:47, schrieb Ignacio Garcia: Hi there and thanks in advance for your help. I wish I could send an automated notification upon receiving emails from a couple of domains. for example, let's assume those domains are hotmail.com and gmail.com. What I need is, everytime my users receive a message from either any...@hotmail.com or any...@gmail.com an automated message is sent to those accounts. Is there anyway I can implement that? Thanks in advance Ignacio do you mean something like vacation mail script or equal ? you might try solve this with sieve , procmail or maildrop etc, but be aware how you configure it, you may get blacklisted anytime anywhere for mail flooding etc, your question sounds not like its a job for postfix itself i.e perhaps look Sieve Notification Mechanism: mailto http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5436 specially read Security Considerations also look on other sieve filters Best Regards MfG Robert Schetterer -- [*] sys4 AG http://sys4.de, +49 (89) 30 90 46 64 Franziskanerstraße 15, 81669 München Sitz der Gesellschaft: München, Amtsgericht München: HRB 199263 Vorstand: Patrick Ben Koetter, Marc Schiffbauer Aufsichtsratsvorsitzender: Florian Kirstein
RE: Mails time before queue manager
On Sat, 22 Mar 2014, KK Patnaik wrote: No I didn't add anything. There are lot of logs like that in my server. I am just trying to resolve the delay of the emails. Please advise. Please do not top-post on this mailing list. KK Patnaik: Mar 20 10:43:55 smtp2 postfix/smtp[13548]: 25142124292D: to=s...@gmail.net, relay=aspmx.l.google.com[74.125.142.26]:25, delay=29217, delays=29775/1441/0.14/1.4, dsn=2.0.0, status=sent (250 2.0.0 OK 1395326635 ac8si2519638icc.108 - gsmtp Mar 20 10:43:55 smtp2 postfix/smtp[13548]: 25142124292D: to=s...@gmail.net, relay=aspmx.l.google.com[74.125.142.26]:25, delay=2217, delays=775/1441/0.14/1.4, dsn=2.0.0, status=sent (250 2.0.0 OK 1395326635 ac8si2519638icc.108 - gsmtp) You are either deliberately lying or you are in so far over your head that you have no business being anywhere near any computer as an administrator. Do you not see that two log excertps above, both sent by you, are the same except that the delays in the first one have been changed from 2217 to 29217 and from 775 to 29775? The first (which was what you sent originally) is obviously doctored as the delay componenents do not equal the total delay (29775 is greater than 29217 so even before getting to the last three delay components, it's obviously bogus). As Wietse said, you've wasted our time. And if you don't know who Wietse is, I suggest you do a search on his name before posting here again. -- Larry Stone lston...@stonejongleux.com
Re: Mails time before queue manager
On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 03:25:58PM -0500, Larry Stone wrote: You are either deliberately lying or you are in so far over your head that you have no business being anywhere near any computer as an administrator. While the OP is not helping by modifying the very information that could be used to solve his problem, the above is taking the admonition way to far. Please apologize and try to stay calm. The OP needs to analyze his logs as a body of data, not single points. One message does not create congestion, which is a result of many messages. Therefore, in addition to employing the tools described in QSHAPE_README, the OP needs to disclose any relevant configuration settings, in particular any rate limited transports, non-default concurrency settings, ... What's critical is to understand where most of the mail is going, whether there are any DNS misconfiguration issues slowing down MX resolution, ... The message input rates and output rates need to be measured and compared. Also the mean c+d value needs to be computed to determine whether there is sufficient output concurrency to deliver the input rate. Notification settings need to be adjusted to reduce congestion from notices about congestion, and recipient validation MUST be enabled properly. -- Viktor.
Re: Mails time before queue manager
On Fri, 21 Mar 2014, Viktor Dukhovni wrote: While the OP is not helping by modifying the very information that could be used to solve his problem, the above is taking the admonition way to far. Please apologize and try to stay calm. I'm calm. But I apologize for the apparent tone of my reply. -- Larry Stone lston...@stonejongleux.com
Re: Permit SASL authenticated users to bypass DMARC
opendmarc and opendkim can support sasl auth, why not make it more simple ? Thanks for config snippet anyway
Re: Permit SASL authenticated users to bypass DMARC
On 03/17/2014 11:08 PM, Oriental Sensation wrote: Birta, Thanks for the prompt input. I think the correct way is the following, though: smtps inet n - n - - smtpd -o smtpd_milters=inet:smtp:10025 Which basically will apply DKIM signatures but jump over DMARC auth. You're confusing smtps with smtp. You likely shouldn't be using smtps at all. Peter
