* Tom Hendrikx via dovecot:
> Or in readable sieve: [...]
Do you mean to imply that regular expressions are not readable? ;-) All
it takes is a little practice. Besides, regex are more efficient. It is
well worth learning about them, and regex are really not as bad as some
make them out to be.
* Lev Serebryakov:
> I need to match all messages sent from some specific domain and all
> its sub-domains.
I prefer using regular expressions for this kind of tests:
if address :regex "From" "[@.]example\.(com|org)$" {...}
This will match all addresses for example.com, example.org and their
* Michael Grant via dovecot:
> If I have a user in /etc/passwd, for example 'joe' and a user in
> /etc/dovecot/users, j...@example.org, and both of these users are in
> fact the same user but different password. They use the same inbox
> and the same mail files.
Do these two share a single user
* Aki Tuomi via dovecot:
> I updated the settings a bit on the server as well. Maybe it works
> better now?
Yes, it does indeed:
Sep 7 19:33:23 ra postfix/smtp[14429]: Trusted TLS connection established to
talvi.dovecot.org[2a04:3545:1000:720:acc1:5bff:fe5e:459]:25: TLSv1.3 with
cipher
* Marc Schiffbauer via dovecot:
> Wild guess: you need to explicitely allow for example DEFAULT@SECLEVEL=0
> ciphersuite in postfix to make *your* openssl accept this remote sslv3
> connection
Thanks, Marc. I had thought about this, and have tried various Postfix
parameters related to TLS
Hello,
I cannot seem to send STARTTLS protected mail to talvi.dovecot.org, and
I was wondering if anybody else sees similar problems:
Sep 6 22:29:10 ra postfix/smtp[15748]: SSL_connect error to
talvi.dovecot.org[94.237.105.223]:25: -1
Sep 6 22:29:10 ra postfix/smtp[15748]: warning: TLS
* TWHG Technical via dovecot:
> I hope this is the right place to start.
Not really. What you are asking for (changing the default configuration
provided by Ubuntu) is something better asked of the Ubuntu package
maintainers, should they even agree with your assessment. They might
tell you that
* Alexander Dalloz:
> IMHO dovecot only consumes the bytecode sieve filter, not the plain
> text source file based on which the bytecode get generated.
Quoting the sievec(1) manual page:
[...] Dovecot's LDA process will first look for a binary file
"dovecot.svbin" when it needs to execute
I noticed lately that I can no longer modify *.sieve files while Dovecot
is running. Write operations appear not to be permitted anymore:
$ echo >> example.sieve
zsh: permission denied: example.sieve
Text editors like vim cannot write either. Since I used to be able to
modify Sieve source
* Robert Moskowitz:
> What I am seeing is that many of the packages seem to roll the
> messages into some SQL database.
Do they?
> My Dovecot setup uses the /home/vmail/doman/../{cur,new,etc} tree
> structure.
That's the classic Maildir format. Widely supported, works fine if file
system nodes
* Tyler Montney:
> I'm getting the feeling that people don't have an MFA implementation.
Probably because it can be complex to set up and maintain, and more
would be gained by educating users and in particular by users actually
giving a damn about password-discipline and -quality.
On a tangent:
* Tyler Montney:
> Since this is getting increasingly complicated, I wanted to ask before
> going further. What do you all do? Any recommendations?
Use strong (as in long and/or randomised and impossible to break using
rainbow table attacks) passwords which are used only once (!) and kept
either
* Stuart Henderson:
> you could perhaps use "auth_bind = yes" to have Dovecot attempt a bind
> with the user-supplied password [...]
Thanks, that sounds like an approach worth investigating to me. Current
access control settings for the LDAP server do not permit this method of
binding, but I
* Alexander Dalloz:
> Don't know about Ubuntu specifics [...]
Thank you for the pointers. Am I right to interpret the Dovecot docs as
stating that SSHA384 is not supported by the official packages, and that
my only recourse might be building from the source code and adding some
external code in
While using LDAP-based authentication, I have come across the message
auth: Error: [...] Unknown scheme SSHA384
Based on the docs at [1] I use the dovecot.org packages provided for
Ubuntu 20.04 LTS which, as you can see, are not yet documented in the
HTML page, put are available via [2].
* sebast...@sebbe.eu:
> When you enter your email address, it would be TRIVIAL to check the
> MX records for the domain and fill those in for the SMTP and IMAP
> servers, allowing users to more easily add (if needed) the domain
> prefix.
As pointed out here before, that approach would not
* Rogier Wolff:
> a few days ago my [Let's Encrypt] certificate expired and the
> fetchmail deamon running in the background had nowhere to
> complain.
> [...]
> Feature request: check the expiry date on the SSL certificate as it
> is being loaded and check for a new certificate if it HAS
* David Pottage:
> is there a setting in dovecot that if it is given an email address as
> a login username it strips off the domain part [...]
You're probably looking for the 'username_format' configuration
parameter.
> If you know how to do that for postfix for sending email, then even
>
* Andreas Born:
> I meant the different stages when receiving mails over SMTP [...]
I am well aware of the technical details of SMTP. Your comment is
unclear to me because the OP did not make any limitations on when he
wants to counter spam, so why would we artificially limit ourselves in
this
* Andreas Born:
> There exists one problem: at this stage of mail reception you have no
> body content nor header information on which a milter may perform
> deeper analysis, only envelope data.
I am not sure what you mean by "this stage of mail reception", or what
software you are using that
* Sami Ketola:
> They do not rely on Date header. Date header is not mandatory and also
> it's not written on server side. It is written by the sender.
Could you please elaborate on "Date header is not mandatory"? As far as
the message format goes, "Date" and "From" are actually the two required
* Marc Roos:
> 3. system recognizes as this email never been seen before
> 4. auto reply with something like (maybe with a wait time of x hours):
>Your message did not receive the final recipient. You are sending
>from a known spam provider
Generating backscatter is definitely not a
* Hendrik Boom:
> I use greylisting with my postfix. On Debian and Devuan th package is
> called 'postgrey'.
Classical, time-based greylisting like Postgrey is problematic in this
age of 2FA and other email-based confirmation codes. Besides, Postfix
has its own, superior mechanism called
* h...@cndns.com:
> For example, in the mail client tool, the user clicks the inbox button
> and only sees the mail within 30 days.
You pretty much answered your own question there. The mail user agent
(MUA, what you called "mail client tool") is the one responsible for
showing only a subset of
* David Mehler:
> I'd ideally like to back up all the mails in the maildir location,
> copy that over, load in my configuration files, and bring the system
> back up.
I don't think this qualifies as "ideal" for migration. My recommendation
is to set up the new server and configure Dovecot
* mj:
> Our autoreply message reads: "Your email has not been read nor
> forwarded", which is also the case, forcing the sender to take action.
No, it does not. An auto-reply message, even if it is actually read by
the sender, can be ignored without penalty. An MTA rejection puts the
ball into
* mj:
> this means those emails are not actually delivered anymore.
Sure. That's how I interpreted your notification text "This message is
sent automatically, and your message has NOT been read nor forwarded."
If the message is not being read, why accept it in the first place?
> For now, I
* mj:
> Can anyone suggest what to do here?
I suggest you don't use Sieve for this, but simply configure Postfix
to reject messages to @old.domain.com with the desired message. MTA
rejections signal clearly that the message has not been delivered, and
you can also include an URL pointing to a
* Stefan G. Weichinger:
> does it make sense in this case to set up replication and let the
> servers replicate at first while still running on the old server?
If you use "dsync over TCP connections" [1], you can set up your new
server without users noticing it (with the exception of extra
* Jean-Daniel:
> One rational for this is to make sure broken clients don’t send clear
> text credential on port 143, even if STARTTLS is required.
If clients are broken, they can send clear text credentials to any port
and a network sniffer could record the content. Heck, one can do stupid
* David Mehler:
> Before I get in to my question is ssl on 993 or starttls on 143 better
> from a security perspective?
On the server side, it makes little difference. STARTTLS just means a
number of extra bytes are exchanged while an encrypted connection is
being established. If you want to
* Yannick SIEGLER:
> auth: Debug: auth client connected (pid=21831)
> pop3-login: Debug: SSL: where=0x10, ret=1: before SSL initialization
Today's announcement[1] about "less secure apps" seems to imply that
POP3/IMAP will soon no longer be an option with G Suite accounts. You
may be better off
* Tom Hendrikx via dovecot:
> There are nice tricks you can do with virtual alias maps and pcre
> within postfix to split email to specific user accounts, which could
> also accommodate other alias schemes than standard subaddressing (such
> as yours).
Postfix supports sub-addressing out of the
* Robert via dovecot:
> We use a simple system for routing emails to different email users by
> postfixing the addresses with the actual user: xxxJohn@domain;
> yyyJohn@domain etc all will be delivered to user John.
> (This way John can invent a new email address on-the-fly and that will
> be
* Thomas Güttler via dovecot:
> https://github.com/guettli/programming-guidelines#regex-are-great---but-its-like-eating-rubbish
Thanks for including the disclaimer "It's my personal opinion and
feeling. No facts, no single truth." in your 'guidelines' (many of which
I disagree with). I just wish
* Thomas Güttler via dovecot:
> Most people use http based APIs today.
And what makes you think that? Who is "most people", exactly? From my
experience over the last 35 years in the business, there is no clear
indication that HTTP-based APIs will dominate in the future. SMTP and
IMAP have been
* Thomas Güttler via dovecot:
> Stateless, http and URLs are the future.
A bold claim, and not worth anything without proof, which is impossible
to provide because you cannot predict the future.
> JavaScript running on in browser or mobile phone can't connect to
> IMAP/SMTP.
That's simply not
* Steve Litt via dovecot:
> Anyone know of such a file manager or browser for IMAP?
If by "file" you mean "mail": Every IMAP capable MUA.
-Ralph
* Odhiambo Washington via dovecot:
> Is it possible? How do I do it for ALL mailboxes?
This has been asked (and answered) recently; see the Dovecot Wiki.
-Ralph
* Voytek Eymont via dovecot:
> or where is the extra 'c' from ?
> "Unknown column 'mailbox.enablesievec'"
sievec is just Pigeonhole's Sieve script compiler. Try "man sievec" in
a shell. I suggested you use it because sievec would report possible
errors in your sieve scripts.
I use script files
Looking at https://dovecot.org/mailman/options/dovecot I see that the
option "Set Reply-To header to list?" does not accept any changes from
me. I assume this might be related to DMARC related header mangling that
was discussed at length before. While I do not want to open that
particular can of
* Steven Smith via dovecot:
> I’m pretty sure it arises from some subtle dovecot configuration
> setting.
Based on your statement that Dovecot does not log connection attempts by
Notes.app, I am not sure this assumption is correct.
> Would you mind posting your `doveconf -n` so that we can
* Voytek Eymont via dovecot:
> what am I missing, how to check ?
Try runing "sievec -u {your_linux_user} /path/to/whatever.sieve" from a
shell and check the resulting error messages.
> postmaster_address = root
Any fully qualified address (postmas...@yourdomain.com seems like a
logical
* Steven Smith via dovecot:
> The issue is that macOS Note.app does not sync with this server.
I'm syncing macOS Mojave's Notes.app with Dovecot without problems, so
it can be done. Have you made sure that you activated both mail and
notes in macOS' Internet Accounts preferences for this
* David Mehler:
> Are there any performance or stability advantages Sdbox over Maildir?
Have you read the documentation at all?
-Ralph
* David Mehler via dovecot:
> Any help appreciated.
https://wiki.dovecot.org/Migration/MailFormat
-Ralph
* Ed W. via dovecot:
> How would you generate scripts for some few thousand users? How would
> you maintain those thousands of scripts when you make changes to the
> template?
A dozen or a few thousand, it makes no difference in terms of the
mechanics involved. Templates and generator scripts
* Rodolfo Gonzalez via dovecot:
> I just have a doubt in the technical side: is it safe to have the
> email in EFS?
"Safe" as in "storing and retreiving will work"? Probably.
I would not do it for privacy reasons, unless all data was encrypted on
a machine before storing it in any service
* lty via dovecot:
> foxmail will not have next step after sending {LIST "" *} command
> action.
Can you please stop this now? If Foxmail is broken, Foxmail needs to be
fixed, not some kludges added to well-behaving Dovecot.
-Ralph
* Ed W. via dovecot:
> My goal is that users can set a user configurable setting (in an
> external front end) and if the email size is greater than this size
> then we will do some processing on it. This particular filter is
> actually in a global sieve filter.
A global script using per-user
* Kunal A. via dovecot:
> Error: mkdir(/var/vmail/ema...@example.com/Maildir) failed: Permission
> denied (euid=5000(vmail) egid=5000(vmail) missing +w perm: /var, dir owned
> by 0:0 mode=0755)
The error message seems pretty clear. User 'vmail' does not have write
permissions for /var, which is
* Juri Haberland via dovecot:
> Blindly enabling DMARC checks without thinking about the consequences
> for themselves should not be the problem of other well behaving
> participants.
Can you judge if DMARC is enabled "blindly"? No, I thought not. Also,
the issue was not on the receiving end,
* Michael Wagner:
> Can't open mailbox 'Archiv/debian-user/2018': Mailbox doesn't exist:
> Archiv/debian-user/2018
As the manpage for doveadm copy/move states: "The destination mailbox
must exist, otherwise this command will fail."
-Ralph
* Jakobus Schürz:
> is anybody else here??? Are my informations to much? Am I alone with
> this fucking shit? Are my informations to less??? Why do I have the
> feeling, nobody else is interesting in this problem?
Members of this mailing list, including the Dovecot authors, are not
required care
* Jakobus Schürz:
> Does it matter, if the keyword-files do not match?
Possibly. The keyword files define flag<->letter mappings. You have
shown two files with mappings (let's call them A and B) with A being a
subset of B. If a file is moved from A to B, all is fine. What happens
if a file is
* Jakobus Schürz:
> 1543935543.M447415P13997.mymail,S=726,W=748:2,Sa
>
> Then i move this email to another IMAP-Folder, and then there is the
> filename
>
> 1543935543.M447415P13997.mymail,S=726,W=748:2,
>
> As expected, the seen-flag disappeared... the same as thunderbird
> shows.
And what
* Jakobus Schürz:
> The \Recent flag ist set and the \Seen-Flag is removed in the new
> folder. So it is not a problem of thunderbird.
Did you mention your data storage format yet? If you use Maildir, Flags
are stored as part of the physical file name. For example, the name
* Jakobus Schürz:
> addflag "Junk";
> setflag "\\seen";
That's probably not what you want, because the 'setflag' command
replaces all existing flags. In any case, I recommend you use this
method instead:
plugin {
sieve_pipe_bin_dir = /etc/dovecot/sievepipe
# Message moved into Spam
* Ruben Safir:
> On Sun, Dec 02, 2018 at 03:58:53AM +0100, Bernd Petrovitsch wrote:
>
>> Let's hope that people who do not know how to use a tool - e.g.
>> like a hammer - doesn't use that tool in the first place
>
> that is pretty unrealistic and I don't agree with it anyway.
The tool
* Michael A. Peters:
> I would wager that over 95% of the time when someone hits the reply
> button on a list post, their intent is to reply to the list.
You'd lose that wager. This list, like many others, has a "List-Post"
header embedded in every single message posted. People need to use smart
* Michael A. Peters:
> Netiquette posts are just someone's opinion, and they often don't take
> into account the vastly different way different types of minds work.
Mailing list netiquette has been around for decades, for good reasons.
If Joe User's mind "works differently", Joe needs to make
* Aki Tuomi:
> doveconf will reliably fail if config file cannot be parsed.
Thanks, that's what I was hoping for.
-Ralph
While trying to determine a given configuration is valid from within a
script, I found that the following works with Dovecot version 2.3.2.1:
#!/usr/bin/env bash
doveconf -n >/dev/null || echo "Config is invalid"
However, the return code is not documented in the doveconf manual page,
and I
* Konra Wawryn:
> I`m searching for some solution which will help me to scale my system
> in the future.
You provided very little information about your requirements, and "to
scale" is just as vague a term. Hence, I recommend an LDAP server,
because it works in many scenarios, can accommodate
On 21.10.18 16:23, André Rodier wrote:
> How can I disable logging these actions from 127.0.0.1?
What you posted looks like syslog output. Add a filter to your syslog
configuration to drop or redirect these messages. This is not a Dovecot
issue per se.
-Ralph
On 16.10.2018 15:43, Yassine Chaouche wrote:
> I don't fully understand how could this prevent them from forwarding
> to any other domain by other means, for example by using a managesieve-
> able client
Well, your OP made no mention of your environment. ;-) You posted on the
Dovecot mailing
On 16.10.18 12:48, Yassine Chaouche wrote:
> I'd like to let my colleagues redirect mail automatically (via a sieve
> filter) to other mailboxes within the same domain, but deny redirects
> to outside domains [...] Ideas ?
Set up a simple internal web application or some other mechanism that
On 11.10.18 14:02, Laura Smith wrote:
> To me, it seems dovecot is not behaving correctly, because if it is
> not using root to access the directory then it is not going to be able
> to chmod the socket later is it ?
I use the following on several Dovecot-plus-Postfix servers, and they
all work
On 11.10.18 13:21, Laura Smith wrote:
> > I suggest using "mode = 0660" instead.
>
> Makes no difference.
That was meant to increase security, not to fix your problem.
> > What exactly do the logs show?
>
> Erm, they show exactly what I posted earlier ?
No. Earlier, you posted this:
>
On 11.10.18 11:30, Laura Smith wrote:
> unix_listener /var/spool/postfix-authrelay/private/dovecot-auth {
> group = postfix
> mode = 0666
> user = postfix
> }
I suggest using "mode = 0660" instead.
> Dovecot is unable to create the socket ?
What exactly do the logs show?
> postconf -c
On 16.01.2018 06:23, Daniel Miller wrote:
> I get about a half dozen rejection messages from various servers when
> I post to this list.
See https://dmarcian.com/dmarc-inspector/amfes.com -- no surprise there,
given the 'reject' policy.
-Ralph
On 08.09.2017 19:51, @lbutlr wrote:
> How I would do it is IF the certificate is expired, the dovecot should
> check if there is a new cert and if so, load it.
New cert as in file modification date or checksum changed? Might work.
Still, from what I seem to remember, Dovecot loads certificate
On 08.09.2017 16:20, LuKreme wrote:
> That is a great solution, but I think it’s probably easier to just
> kick dovecot once a month.
Certbot hooks are very easy to write, and are only executed when the
certificate is updated. In that light, I can see no advantage in "kick
dovecot once a month".
On 08.09.2017 17:11, Markus Rosjat wrote:
> I have a LDAP dir with an attribute set to 0 or 1 and in my old setup
> (a courier server) I used this attribute to map it to an authoption
> called disableimap. This prevent users to access the mailbox with imap
> protocol.
>
> So the question is what
On 01.09.17 17:04, nlek...@gmail.com wrote:
> I have two servers using dovecot and want to sync them with doveasm ..
> I am using usersb as user backend database
>
> Can anyone help me config them... Is there any use guide about it ?
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=dovecot+sync
-Ralph
On 22.08.2017 12:10, Jerry wrote:
> I saw nothing about the Postfix master.cf file. Do I need to make
> and changes to it also?
No need. Assuming that you use a socket, the following combination
should suffice:
# Dovecot
service lmtp {
unix_listener
On 20.08.2017 19:50, KT Walrus wrote:
> I use Cloudflare (free DNS) and DNS Made Easy (paid DNS). I would never
> run my own DNS service except for communicating between my Docker
> services internally
I run my own nameservers for various reasons, not the least of them
being DNSSEC. My zones'
On 18.08.2017 09:12, voy...@sbt.net.au wrote:
> for a public web server where https is becoming mandatory, I'd still
> need a certificate from a recognized publisher, to avoid users geting
> 'warnings', is that so ?
For a certificate to be reported as "valid", an unbroken chain of
cryptographic
On 18.08.2017 08:58, Michael Felt wrote:
> as Ralph mentions in his reply - Let's encrypt certs are only for
> three months - never ending circus.
I don't consider the 90-day-lifespan a "circus". It is meant as a
security feature[1], and Let's Encrypt suggests using automation for
certificate
On 11.08.2017 11:36, Michael Felt wrote:
> This is what Ralph means when he says "have been running a CA for
> 15+ years" - not that he is (though he could!) sell certificates
> commercially - rather, he is using an initial certificate to sign
> later certificates with.
Actually, I do sell
On 10.08.2017 14:57, Alef Veld wrote:
> I generated a new certificate for dovecot, and ever since I have this
> weird problem that my iPhone can still receive mail but cannot send
> using that mailserver. Same for my iMac.
Mail is not sent through Dovecot, but through an MTA. Based on your
On 10.08.2017 09:18, Stephan von Krawczynski wrote:
> It would be far better to use a self-signed certificate that can be
> checked through some instance/host set inside your domain.
I have been running a CA for 15+ years, generating certificates only for
servers I personally maintain. Since my
On 09.08.2017 18:18, Alef Veld wrote:
> Anyone know of any manual, or can I just replace the certs in the
> dovecot and postfix locations with theirs? Do dovecot, postfix and
> apache all support .pem format?
Google "dovecot letsencrypt" is your friend. ;-) If you have questions
about details,
On 09.08.2017 17:49, Alef Veld wrote:
> I think let’s encrypt uses certbot though and it can’t do email
> certificates (although i’m sure i can convert the cert i get from
> let’s encrypt, i’ll look into it.
I'm not sure what you mean by "can’t do email certificates"? In any
case, Let's Encrypt
On 09.08.2017 17:20, Alef Veld wrote:
> So i’m using dovecot, and i created a self signed certificate with
> mkcert.sh based on dovecot-openssl.cnf. The name in there matches my
> mail server.
>
> The first time it connects in mac mail however, it says the certificate
> is invalid and another
On 12.02.17 19:05, George Kontostanos wrote:
> Actually I think that sa-learn is invoked as user vmail. But of course
> I might be wrong.
It might depend on system configuration. On my servers, Sieve scripts are
definitely executed as the OS user that matches the current IMAP user.
> Do you
On 12.02.2017 17:36, George Kontostanos wrote:
> it automatically creates a .spamassassin/ folder in the user
That happens because sa-learn is invoked as the user who is logged into
IMAP. If you want all users to contribute to a global SpamAssassin
database (like I do), you'll need to create
On 12.02.2017 13:25, Stephan Bosch wrote:
> The "imap.mailbox" environment is the empty string in this case. Why?
> Well, the Sieve interpreter does not know about it, since the
> "imapsieve" extension is not activated in the require line.
Now there's a facepalm moment. ;-) Thank you, with a
On 10.02.17 20:34, Michael Slusarz wrote:
> When you move a message to a new mailbox, that is a "new message"
> event (a new UID in the target mailbox is created; the message count
> increases). So imap.mailbox is set to the name of the *target* mailbox.
My tests seem to indicate otherwise.
On 10.02.17 18:34, Michael Slusarz wrote:
> > Can we add an exception for the Trash folder?
>
> This is handled in the sieve script. E.g.:
>
> require "environment";
> if environment "imap.mailbox" "Trash" {
> stop;
> }
This does not work for me, and I don't really expect it to work either.
On 10.02.17 18:22, Zhang Huangbin wrote:
> My concern is, will you experience any lag while moving message?
I don't use direct calls to sa-learn, but store the piped e-mails on
disk, and a periodic cron-job picks them up and invokes sa-learn. This
way, there is no noticeable lag.
-Ralph
On 10.02.2017 16:09, Darac Marjal wrote:
> Check out https://wiki.dovecot.org/Pigeonhole/Sieve/Plugins/IMAPSieve,
> which explains that sieve is normally only used at delivery time, but
> the sieve_imapsieve plugin runs a *different* sieve script based on
> IMAP actions (for example, COPY).
On 10.02.2017 09:06, Aki Tuomi wrote:
> Since antispam plugin is deprecated and we would really prefer people
> not to use it, we wrote instructions on how to replace it with IMAPSieve.
In my setup, I use the following sieve script globally for all users:
if header :is "X-Spam-Flag" "YES" {
On 01.12.2016 21:40, Curtis Vaughan wrote:
> Just set up a new server with postfix and dovecot. I don't know why,
> but as soon as mail is accessed it is marked read. I'll see emails
> momentarily marked unread, but then switch to read later although I
> haven't opened them.
Accessed how? It is
On 17.11.2016 08:48, Steve Litt wrote:
> What email clients are all of you using to look at your IMAP email?
I prefer Mozilla Thunderbird. It runs on Linux, macOS and Windows; works
nicely with all sorts of IMAP servers; handles mailing lists well; and
the multiple-identity-support (more than
On 19.08.2016 14:12, Aki Tuomi wrote:
> Depends how your MUA validates the certificate.
>
> If it just checks CA, then no. Also I don't think the private key
> changes, so it should not cause recheck either. Other checks, maybe.
Last time I checked, the LetsEncrypt client generated a fresh key
Hello,
I struggled a bit with getting the antispam plugin to work, because the
plugin configuration in http://wiki2.dovecot.org/Plugins/Antispam is
incomplete. After some twiddling, I ended up with this:
# /etc/dovecot/conf.d/90-plugin.conf
plugin {
antispam_backend = mailtrain
On 26.01.11 15:03, Robert Schetterer wrote:
apple has a long tradition of imap bugs, dont by it , dont use it, dont
recommend for imap use
Sigh... iOS 4.1 works fine with Dovecot (IMAP w/ SSL, use path prefix /).
-Ralph
On 25.08.10 18:52, Timo Sirainen wrote:
So you want to drop the domain? I'm not sure if you can do this on
Postfix's side [...]
I don't think so, based on the e-mails I received. It has been rightly
pointed that LMTP requires fully qualified e-mail addresses.
Now I try to find a LDAP-only
On 28.08.10 17:55, Charles Marcus wrote:
So... why not just use LDA?
I you read the complete thread, you'll find that Timo suggested using
LMTP instead of LDA to avoid the need for a world-writeable socket.
1 - 100 of 130 matches
Mail list logo
