2009/2/17 mouss mo...@ml.netoyen.net:
$ maildrop -v
maildrop 2.0.4 Copyright 1998-2005 Double Precision, Inc.
GDBM extensions enabled.
Courier Authentication Library extension enabled.
Maildir quota extension enabled.
This program is distributed under the terms of the GNU General Public
Hello!
I am using Address verification now with ~90% success (using it over a
year now).
The only flaw i didn't find a solution yet is the following:
When a server rejects an e-mail address with 5xx, mine rejects it only
with 4xx. But! I would like to reject them with 4xx if the foreign
--
С уважением,
Пименов Д.А.
Sorry for taking long ... tried to do some research on the hints I got
from over here but failed miserably... below are my comments ...
Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2009 00:13:32 +0100
From: mo...@ml.netoyen.net
To: postfix-users@postfix.org
Subject: Re: Postfix + Maildrop
sim085 a écrit :
[snip]
I am not receiving from ukranz-r...@unfccc.int
Why? - reject_unverified_sender??
== maillog =
Feb 17 09:02:30 guarani postfix/smtpd[18968]: NOQUEUE: reject: RCPT from
unknown[62.225.2.61]:550 5.1.7 ukranz-r...@unfccc.int: Sender address
rejected: undeliverable address:
Alexandre Balistrieri wrote:
I am not receiving from ukranz-r...@unfccc.int
Why? - reject_unverified_sender??
== maillog =
Feb 17 09:02:30 guarani postfix/smtpd[18968]: NOQUEUE: reject: RCPT from
unknown[62.225.2.61]:550 5.1.7 ukranz-r...@unfccc.int: Sender address
Thanks for the help guys, I was unaware of that option and have no
idea why I enabled it in the first place. Sorry about that.
--
Sincerely
Erik Paulsen Skålerud
Halassy Zoltán wrote:
Halassy Zoltán írta:
(sorry pushed the send button accidentally previously)
Take a look at
http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#unverified_recipient_reject_code
man 5 postconf
reject_unverified_recipient
Yes, i know this one exists. But i guess this one
Noel,
Thanks for pointing out the obvious!!!
I had my head in the weeds. I'm in the processes of setting up a valid DNS
entry for the authoritative query and it should then connect to my rbldnsd
server.
Charles
Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2009 13:39:15 -0600
From: njo...@megan.vbhcs.org
To:
Jim Seymour wrote:
Hi All,
I'm simplifiying my life. Amonst other things, that means I'm dropping
my business class DSL circuit and all of my involvement in projects,
documentation, anti-spam efforts, etc.
If somebody *qualified* wants to officially take over maintenance of
Pflogsumm, please
I read this page http://www.postfix.org/FILTER_README.html but I am
not having any luck getting my pipe set up.
I want to make it so all mail destined for a particular subdomain is
run through a script and then discarded.
The 'all mail for a subdomain' requirement makes me think I need to
use
Jon Drukman:
I read this page http://www.postfix.org/FILTER_README.html but I am
not having any luck getting my pipe set up.
I want to make it so all mail destined for a particular subdomain is
run through a script and then discarded.
For that, FILTER_README is not applicable (it delvers
On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 11:50 AM, Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org wrote:
/etc/postfix/example-recipients
o...@example.com whatever
t...@example.com whatever
This is a relay domain setup. Virtual aliases solve a different problem.
could i use a virtual alias to relay an
Hi,
I'm looking for a good solution to make my postfix server operate faster.
My setup is Postfix + Policyd-weight + fail2ban, but nothing helps under
heavy load, and the problem is not with the server performance (CPU load
is not so high, about 30%), the problem is in the number of
smtp
Jon Drukman:
still getting this
to=in...@in.thismoment.com, relay=local, delay=0.05,
This mail is sent to LOCAL not PIPE. Your transport map is not working.
Wieste
On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 2:15 PM, Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org wrote:
Jon Drukman:
still getting this
to=in...@in.thismoment.com, relay=local, delay=0.05,
This mail is sent to LOCAL not PIPE. Your transport map is not working.
$ cat transport
in.thismoment.com parsemail:
$ grep
Jon Drukman:
On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 2:15 PM, Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org wrote:
Jon Drukman:
still getting this
to=in...@in.thismoment.com, relay=local, delay=0.05,
This mail is sent to LOCAL not PIPE. Your transport map is not working.
$ cat transport
in.thismoment.com
On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 2:30 PM, Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org wrote:
what am i missing?
Are the transport map lookups configured?
$ postconf -n transport_maps
that was it. for some reason that option is not listed in the default
main.cf on my box.
thanks!
-jsd-
Hi,
I found an email from Noel Jones:
At 09:51 AM 8/2/2007, Marshal Newrock wrote:
If not, what do I need to do in order to use header and body
checks to reject mail after it has been scanned with the milter?
Header_checks does not inspect headers added by milters in the same instance
of
Charles Account wrote:
Hi,
I found an email from Noel Jones:
At 09:51 AM 8/2/2007, Marshal Newrock wrote:
If not, what do I need to do in order to use header and body
checks to reject mail after it has been scanned with the milter?
Header_checks does not inspect headers added by milters
I need to delay all outbound email, not specific to destination
domains. I have tried to make the smtp_destination_rate_delay = 180
but I believe that must work in conjunction with specific domains
(please someone tell me if that is the case because the documentation,
although it says one
On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 2:34 PM, Jon Drukman jdruk...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 2:30 PM, Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org wrote:
what am i missing?
Are the transport map lookups configured?
$ postconf -n transport_maps
that was it. for some reason that option is not
Jon Drukman:
in...@in.thismoment.com: Recipient address rejected: User unknown in
local recipient table; from=jdruk...@gmail.com
USE relay_domains and relay_recipient_maps
NOT virtual_alias_*
NOT virtual_mailbox_*
NOT mydestination
I recently started bouncing email because (it appears) I had a mixture
of space-indentation and tab-indentation on the multi-line $mydestinations
line.
Should postfix really be doing this? It seems straightforward to me
to treat all whitespace the same, and it would prevent a mail-losing
error
Travis:
I recently started bouncing email because (it appears) I had a mixture
of space-indentation and tab-indentation on the multi-line $mydestinations
line.
Should postfix really be doing this? It seems straightforward to me
to treat all whitespace the same, and it would prevent a
On Wed, 18 Feb 2009, Travis wrote:
I recently started bouncing email because (it appears) I had a mixture
of space-indentation and tab-indentation on the multi-line $mydestinations
line.
Show logs and output of the following command:
% postconf mydestination
--
Sahil Tandon
On Wed, 18 Feb 2009, jeffs wrote:
Thank you for your prompt reply.
No problem, but please do not top-post; place all future replies *below*
quoted text. Thanks.
I am working on a project in which -- depending on the level of the
users subscription -- either their mail is delayed for at
Sahil Tandon wrote:
On Wed, 18 Feb 2009, jeffs wrote:
Thank you for your prompt reply.
No problem, but please do not top-post; place all future replies *below*
quoted text. Thanks.
I am working on a project in which -- depending on the level of the
users subscription -- either
Sahil Tandon wrote:
On Wed, 18 Feb 2009, jeffs wrote:
On Wed, 18 Feb 2009, jeffs wrote:
Thank you for your prompt reply.
No problem, but please do not top-post; place all future replies *below*
quoted text. Thanks.
I am working on a project in which --
On Wed, 18 Feb 2009, Melvyn Sopacua wrote:
On Wednesday 18 February 2009 16:56:05 jeffs wrote:
Sahil Tandon wrote:
On Wed, 18 Feb 2009, jeffs wrote:
Thank you for your prompt reply.
No problem, but please do not top-post; place all future replies *below*
quoted text. Thanks.
--- Original Message ---
From: Melvyn Sopacua m...@dnr.servegame.org
To: postfix-users@postfix.org, je...@speakeasy.net
Sent: 18-Feb-09, 20:35:59
Subject: Re: delay all outbound mail
On Wednesday 18 February 2009 16:56:05 jeffs wrote:
Sahil Tandon wrote:
On Wed, 18 Feb 2009,
The docs at http://www.postfix.org mention several features available in
postfix 2.6(experimental).
Where is the complete changelog of postfix 2.6 available
On Wednesday 18 February 2009 17:45:20 Sahil Tandon wrote:
My point was to implement the delay based on the OP's criteria *outside* of
Postfix. Whether this is done in the same application the OP mentioned or
another one (say, a policy service as you mention below) is an interesting
* ram r...@netcore.co.in:
The docs at http://www.postfix.org mention several features available in
postfix 2.6(experimental).
Where is the complete changelog of postfix 2.6 available
ftp://ftp.porcupine.org/mirrors/postfix-release/experimental/*.HISTORY
--
Ralf Hildebrandt
On Wednesday 18 February 2009 19:32:53 Michael Orlitzky wrote:
I won't make any claims as to the correctness or efficiency of this
approach, but one way that I've seen this done is to store a record in
the database immediately, and then have a (cron) PHP script running
every 5 minutes or so
35 matches
Mail list logo
