On 18/04/2023 17:45, Jan Ingvoldstad via Exim-users wrote:
17. apr. 2023 kl. 14:44 skrev Sebastian Arcus via Exim-users
:
I couldn't agree more. I am permanently scarred emotionally from installing and
configuring SpamAssassin for the first time - and even after years of working
with
> 17. apr. 2023 kl. 14:44 skrev Sebastian Arcus via Exim-users
> :
>
> I couldn't agree more. I am permanently scarred emotionally from installing
> and configuring SpamAssassin for the first time - and even after years of
> working with it I don't feel like I've managed to tame it :-)
c
On 17/04/2023 04:33, Ian Z via Exim-users wrote:
On Sun, Apr 16, 2023 at 07:11:51PM +0100, Sebastian Arcus via Exim-users wrote:
One thing I have to try and figure out is how Spamassassin does the
SPF checks. Does it look at all the Received: headers, and if at
least one of them matches one
On Sun, Apr 16, 2023 at 07:11:51PM +0100, Sebastian Arcus via Exim-users wrote:
> One thing I have to try and figure out is how Spamassassin does the
> SPF checks. Does it look at all the Received: headers, and if at
> least one of them matches one of the SPF records, then it's all
> fine?
On 16/04/2023 20:22, Jeremy Harris via Exim-users wrote:
On 16/04/2023 19:17, Sebastian Arcus via Exim-users wrote:
relay_to_compan1:
driver = manualroute
domains = company1.com
route_list = company1.com 192.168.100.10
transport = remote_relay_company1
host_find_failed = defer
On 16/04/2023 11:44, Jeremy Harris via Exim-users wrote:
On 15/04/2023 23:31, Sebastian Arcus via Exim-users wrote:
you might be able to use cutthrough delivery from the front-end to the
real server, which might allow you to reject rather than bounce some
of the time; it might even help with
On 16/04/2023 19:17, Sebastian Arcus via Exim-users wrote:
relay_to_compan1:
driver = manualroute
domains = company1.com
route_list = company1.com 192.168.100.10
transport = remote_relay_company1
host_find_failed = defer
relay_to_compan2:
driver = manualroute
domains =
On 16/04/2023 11:04, Paul Muster via Exim-users wrote:
On 15.04.23 21:54, Sebastian Arcus via Exim-users wrote:
The "back-end" machines are physical machines, on regular
ADSL/VDSL/cable/fibre connections at various locations.
At the moment they send directly to the internet, which requires a
On 15/04/2023 23:16, Fabio Martins wrote:
solution inline
On 2023-04-15 17:05, Sebastian Arcus via Exim-users wrote:
On 15/04/2023 17:00, Fabio Martins wrote:
I believe you are trying to use the same IP address for the 3 exim
instances, otherwise the solution would be quite simple binding
On 15/04/2023 21:38, Jeremy Harris via Exim-users wrote:
On 15/04/2023 13:53, Jeremy Harris via Exim-users wrote:
Exim does talk the inbound-proxy protocol tha HAProxy apparently uses (or can use):
https://exim.org/exim-html-current/doc/html/spec_html/ch-proxies.html#SECTproxyInbound
On 2023-04-15, Sebastian Arcus via Exim-users wrote:
> On 15/04/2023 13:53, Jeremy Harris via Exim-users wrote:
>> On 15/04/2023 12:53, Sebastian Arcus via Exim-users wrote:
>>> I have a number of Exim servers behind a NAT gateway (actually
>>> connected with vpn's to a cloud vps - but I'm
On Sun, 16 Apr 2023, Jeremy Harris via Exim-users wrote:
On 15/04/2023 23:31, Sebastian Arcus via Exim-users wrote:
you might be able to use cutthrough delivery from the front-end to the
real server, which might allow you to reject rather than bounce some of
the time; it might even help with
On 2023-04-15, Sebastian Arcus via Exim-users wrote:
> I have a number of Exim servers behind a NAT gateway (actually connected
> with vpn's to a cloud vps - but I'm hoping this is not relevant to this
> post). I would like the gateway to send incoming port 25 traffic to the
> correct Exim
On 15/04/2023 23:31, Sebastian Arcus via Exim-users wrote:
you might be able to use cutthrough delivery from the front-end to the
real server, which might allow you to reject rather than bounce some of the
time; it might even help with your SPF dilemma ?
That was my intention - so that the
On 15.04.23 21:54, Sebastian Arcus via Exim-users wrote:
The "back-end" machines are physical machines, on regular
ADSL/VDSL/cable/fibre connections at various locations.
At the moment
they send directly to the internet, which requires a static IP and PTR
record.
To solve all of the above
On Sat, 15 Apr 2023, Sebastian Arcus via Exim-users wrote:
I don't know what sort of latency there will be between these machines,
but you might be able to use cutthrough delivery from the front-end to the
real server, which might allow you to reject rather than bounce some of the
time; it
On 15/04/2023 23:19, Andrew C Aitchison wrote:
On Sat, 15 Apr 2023, Sebastian Arcus via Exim-users wrote:
On 15/04/2023 21:20, Evgeniy Berdnikov via Exim-users wrote:
On Sat, Apr 15, 2023 at 08:44:08PM +0100, Sebastian Arcus via
Exim-users wrote:
These are all separate servers belonging to
solution inline
On 2023-04-15 17:05, Sebastian Arcus via Exim-users wrote:
On 15/04/2023 17:00, Fabio Martins wrote:
I believe you are trying to use the same IP address for the 3 exim
instances, otherwise the solution would be quite simple binding each
instance to the proper IP address.
On Sat, 15 Apr 2023, Sebastian Arcus via Exim-users wrote:
On 15/04/2023 21:20, Evgeniy Berdnikov via Exim-users wrote:
On Sat, Apr 15, 2023 at 08:44:08PM +0100, Sebastian Arcus via Exim-users
wrote:
These are all separate servers belonging to different organisations. They
each host their
On 15/04/2023 21:20, Evgeniy Berdnikov via Exim-users wrote:
On Sat, Apr 15, 2023 at 08:44:08PM +0100, Sebastian Arcus via Exim-users wrote:
These are all separate servers belonging to different organisations. They
each host their own mail domain and users. This can't be changed. I am not
On 15/04/2023 18:01, Sebastian Arcus via Exim-users wrote:
I think I would have to run Spamassassin on the "proxy" Exim, as otherwise the
IP address of the proxy will be added to the headers during the delivery/relay process,
and will probably break the SPF checks in Spamassassin on the final
I believe you are trying to use the same IP address for the 3 exim
instances, otherwise the solution would be quite simple binding each
instance to the proper IP address. Right? Or do you have 3 different
public IP addresses?
If you have only 1 public IP, does a solution forwarding to a
On 15/04/2023 13:53, Jeremy Harris via Exim-users wrote:
Exim does talk the inbound-proxy protocol tha HAProxy apparently uses (or can
use):
https://exim.org/exim-html-current/doc/html/spec_html/ch-proxies.html#SECTproxyInbound
Thinking further, this (HAProxy with Proxy-protocol as a
On Sat, Apr 15, 2023 at 08:44:08PM +0100, Sebastian Arcus via Exim-users wrote:
> These are all separate servers belonging to different organisations. They
> each host their own mail domain and users. This can't be changed. I am not
> looking to do load balancing. I am looking to share the public
On 15/04/2023 18:50, Evgeniy Berdnikov via Exim-users wrote:
On Sat, Apr 15, 2023 at 06:03:29PM +0100, Sebastian Arcus wrote:
On 15/04/2023 16:46, Evgeniy Berdnikov via Exim-users wrote:
My question is: why do you want to use so complicated scheme, while it's
very simple task to set up
On 15/04/2023 19:09, Andrew C Aitchison wrote:
On Sat, 15 Apr 2023, Sebastian Arcus wrote:
On 15/04/2023 18:44, Andrew C Aitchison wrote:
On Sat, 15 Apr 2023, Sebastian Arcus via Exim-users wrote:
I have a number of Exim servers behind a NAT gateway (actually
connected with vpn's to a
On Sat, 15 Apr 2023, Sebastian Arcus wrote:
On 15/04/2023 18:44, Andrew C Aitchison wrote:
On Sat, 15 Apr 2023, Sebastian Arcus via Exim-users wrote:
I have a number of Exim servers behind a NAT gateway (actually connected
with vpn's to a cloud vps - but I'm hoping this is not relevant to
On 15/04/2023 13:53, Jeremy Harris via Exim-users wrote:
On 15/04/2023 12:53, Sebastian Arcus via Exim-users wrote:
I have a number of Exim servers behind a NAT gateway (actually
connected with vpn's to a cloud vps - but I'm hoping this is not
relevant to this post). I would like the gateway
On 15/04/2023 16:46, Evgeniy Berdnikov via Exim-users wrote:
On Sat, Apr 15, 2023 at 12:53:54PM +0100, Sebastian Arcus via Exim-users wrote:
I have a number of Exim servers behind a NAT gateway (actually connected
with vpn's to a cloud vps - but I'm hoping this is not relevant to this
post). I
On 15/04/2023 18:44, Andrew C Aitchison wrote:
On Sat, 15 Apr 2023, Sebastian Arcus via Exim-users wrote:
I have a number of Exim servers behind a NAT gateway (actually
connected with vpn's to a cloud vps - but I'm hoping this is not
relevant to this post). I would like the gateway to send
On Sat, Apr 15, 2023 at 06:03:29PM +0100, Sebastian Arcus wrote:
> On 15/04/2023 16:46, Evgeniy Berdnikov via Exim-users wrote:
> > My question is: why do you want to use so complicated scheme, while it's
> > very simple task to set up a farm of Exim servers, each operating for
> > several
On Sat, 15 Apr 2023, Sebastian Arcus via Exim-users wrote:
I have a number of Exim servers behind a NAT gateway (actually connected with
vpn's to a cloud vps - but I'm hoping this is not relevant to this post). I
would like the gateway to send incoming port 25 traffic to the correct Exim
On 15/04/2023 17:00, Fabio Martins wrote:
I believe you are trying to use the same IP address for the 3 exim
instances, otherwise the solution would be quite simple binding each
instance to the proper IP address. Right? Or do you have 3 different
public IP addresses?
That's correct - there
On Sat, Apr 15, 2023 at 12:53:54PM +0100, Sebastian Arcus via Exim-users wrote:
> I have a number of Exim servers behind a NAT gateway (actually connected
> with vpn's to a cloud vps - but I'm hoping this is not relevant to this
> post). I would like the gateway to send incoming port 25 traffic to
On 15/04/2023 12:53, Sebastian Arcus via Exim-users wrote:
I have a number of Exim servers behind a NAT gateway (actually connected with
vpn's to a cloud vps - but I'm hoping this is not relevant to this post). I
would like the gateway to send incoming port 25 traffic to the correct Exim
I have a number of Exim servers behind a NAT gateway (actually connected
with vpn's to a cloud vps - but I'm hoping this is not relevant to this
post). I would like the gateway to send incoming port 25 traffic to the
correct Exim server based on SNI in incoming TLS packets - as different
Exim
36 matches
Mail list logo
