W dniu 2009-03-03 23:34, MacShane, Tracy pisze:
We have a very clear policy that users are only permitted to relay mail
from our networks. If they are sending from home, they use webmail.
We've had one or two instances where external organisations have used
some kind of auto-reply mechanism
Hi all
Just to clarify some points
They are running an IMAP server with SASL login for remote users
Regards
_
From: owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org
[mailto:owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org] On Behalf Of Pawel Lesniak
Sent: 04 March 2009 10:32 AM
To: postfix users list
Wietse Venema escribió:
Santiago Romero:
I case it happens again ... Where or what should I take a look? At OS
level (disk or network I/O, processes...) I didn't see anything before
the postfix restart...
Try ``strace -o filename -p pid'' or the equivalent for your OS.
Hi.
On 3/3/2009 7:18 PM, LuKreme wrote:
opendns works very well, as long as you disable the helper crap,
so, no, has nothing to do with opendns.
Since one of the features of OpenDNS Is the so-called helper crap,
and is enabled by default, this can easily be a problem.
For the clueless maybe, but
Victor Duchovni escribió:
On Wed, Mar 04, 2009 at 12:29:29AM -0200, Miguel Da Silva - Centro de
Matem?tica wrote:
Mar 2 18:42:02 smtp postfix/smtpd[15652]: NOQUEUE: reject: RCPT from
r190-134-zz-xx.dialup.adsl.anteldata.net.uy[190.134.zz.
xx]: 450 4.7.1 dest...@cmat.edu.uy: Recipient address
Noel Jones escribió:
Miguel Da Silva - Centro de Matemática wrote:
Dear users, I realized today that the local SMTP server is not working
as expected.
I found these lines in the log files:
Mar 2 22:42:48 smtp postfix/smtpd[30427]: 1A66913105B:
Hello Folks,
I am a longtime Linux user and admin. Server drive got somewhat corrupt
so I re-installed to new drive. Using Mandrive 2009.0 from the live CD
with Postfix retrieved via urpmi. Using 2.2 and Dovecot. Tried Cyrus
also. I have used uw-pop3 and pop-before-smtp in the past.
On 3/4/2009, Robert A. Ober (ro...@robob.com) wrote:
# dovecot -n command gives a clean output of the changed settings. Use it
# instead of copypasting this file when posting to the Dovecot mailing list.
# --with-ssldir=/etc/ssl
You need to read the welcome message you got...
ONLY provide
On Wed, Mar 04, 2009 at 09:31:21AM -0500, Charles Marcus wrote:
On 3/4/2009, Robert A. Ober (ro...@robob.com) wrote:
# dovecot -n command gives a clean output of the changed settings. Use it
# instead of copypasting this file when posting to the Dovecot mailing
list.
#
On Wed, Mar 04, 2009 at 09:35:38AM -0200, Miguel Da Silva - Centro de
Matem?tica wrote:
The user was not relaying: mail was sent to a domain you are responsible
for, so this was not blocked by reject_unauth_destination.
Well... I don't think so, maybe I am not understandig
I can state with authority that mail with sender==recipient is not
universally 100% spam, and such a policy would likely have a much
higher false positive rate than zen. You can argue it's a
misconfiguration of the sender, but a mail admin's job is to receive
legit mail. but you're welcome
On Wed, Mar 04, 2009 at 09:40:51AM -0200, Miguel Da Silva - Centro de
Matem?tica wrote:
smtpd_recipient_restrictions =
check_recipient_access hash:/etc/postfix/bloqueados
permit_mynetworks
permit_sasl_authenticated
reject_unauth_destination
I am noticing that for some reason every time a specific user on my
domain attempts to email a particular domain, the messages are always
queued up. They don't ever appear to send for some reason and I
checked the logs which don't really give any specific reason why he
can't send email to this
Carlos Williams wrote:
I am noticing that for some reason every time a specific user on my
domain attempts to email a particular domain, the messages are always
queued up. They don't ever appear to send for some reason and I
checked the logs which don't really give any specific reason why he
2009/3/5 Carlos Williams carlosw...@gmail.com:
mail:~# postqueue -p
-Queue ID- --Size-- Arrival Time -Sender/Recipient---
4DB191FA4D50 84627 Mon Mar 2 14:59:56 �...@mydomain.com
(connect to je.jfcom.mil[140.32.76.138]:25: Connection timed out)
Thanks for that info. Can someone also comment on this? I asked a
friend via email and this was his response to the same issue:
**
I used nslookup to verify the address your queue is showing, and it
does correspond to je.jfcom.mil. But a request for the
On 3/4/2009 8:39 AM, Victor Duchovni wrote:
On Wed, Mar 04, 2009 at 09:31:21AM -0500, Charles Marcus wrote:
On 3/4/2009, Robert A. Ober (ro...@robob.com) wrote:
# dovecot -n command gives a clean output of the changed settings. Use it
# instead of copypasting this file when posting
Hi Robert,
You need to read the responses you are getting...
PS: postfix -n gives invalid option.
This is because of this:
If I recall correctly the OP reported using Postfix 2.2 and- should
see:
http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#smtpd_sasl_type
attempts to use Dovecot SASL auth
I'm trying to allow users to reply to Bugzilla emails, but I'm having trouble
getting Postfix to execute the command that
handles this. The proper alias is defined:
$ postconf | grep ^alias_maps
alias_maps = hash:/etc/aliases, hash:/usr/local/mailman/data/aliases
$ grep bugzilla-daemon
On 3/4/2009 9:50 AM, Robert A. Ober wrote:
On 3/4/2009 9:48 AM, Charles Marcus wrote:
Hi Robert,
You need to read the responses you are getting...
PS: postfix -n gives invalid option.
This is because of this:
No, postfix -n does not return anything except a posfix
Paweł Leśniak wrote:
I think that situations pointed by you are rather rare.
I see them often enough here that I can't reject based solely
on this criteria, but I do add a couple spamassassin points.
If it's rare at your site, lucky you.
I don't know of
any, so I'm fine with rejecting 0
On 3/4/2009, Scent-Sations Support (grkni...@scent-team.com) wrote:
Charles means 'postconf -n'.
This gives us a better picture of what Postfix is using and avoids fat
finger mistakes.
Ooops... lol, sorry, thanks for catching that...
On 3/4/2009 9:56 AM, Scent-Sations Support wrote:
Robert A. Ober wrote:
On 3/4/2009 9:48 AM, Charles Marcus wrote:
No, postfix -n does not return anything except a posfix generated
error. It does not like the -n .
Charles means 'postconf -n'.
This gives us a better picture
Victor Duchovni escribió:
On Wed, Mar 04, 2009 at 09:35:38AM -0200, Miguel Da Silva - Centro de
Matem?tica wrote:
The user was not relaying: mail was sent to a domain you are responsible
for, so this was not blocked by reject_unauth_destination.
Well... I don't think so, maybe I am not
A couple years ago there was a discussion about having Postfix SMTP
servers pause for several seconds at the start of each SMTP session,
and reject the session if the client speaks first. The idea was
that this is a sure sign that the client is a piece of crapware.
Although the idea of proactive
* Kirk Strauser k...@strauser.com:
I'm trying to allow users to reply to Bugzilla emails, but I'm having trouble
getting Postfix to execute the command that
handles this. The proper alias is defined:
$ postconf | grep ^alias_maps
alias_maps = hash:/etc/aliases,
Kirk Strauser:
$ sudo /usr/local/www/data/bugzilla/email_in.pl /tmp/bugtest
This executes the command as ROOT. This test is invalid because:
Mar 4 09:46:31 web2 local[61974]: fatal: execvp
/usr/local/www/data/bugzilla/email_in.pl: No such file or directory
This executes the command as
Thank you Noel this works perfectly. You rock.
On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 6:54 PM, Noel Jones njo...@megan.vbhcs.org wrote:
Big Pizzle wrote:
On our old server that doesn't do any Virtual Domains, we have lines in our
/etc/alias which look like the following: usera:
Wietse Venema wrote:
Although the idea of proactive botnet detection has merit, building
delays into the SMTPD process is very problematic. It causes Postfix
to waste more time on bogus SMTP clients, so that it reaches the
all SMTP servers busy condition sooner.
I thought some smtp reverse
Hi, all. My company has a web server hosted by an external provider. It
sends out e-mail (e.g., in response to web forms), and, occasionally, it
gets bounced and/or eaten up by spam filters. What I'd like to do is
relay mail from the web server through our corporate server, but make it
look as
On Wed, Mar 04, 2009 at 11:10:13AM -0500, Charles Marcus wrote:
Dovecot has added two lines of text to the beginning output of dovecot
-n that could possibly save some time with troubleshooting...
It adds the version on the first line, and OS/platform info on the
second line, like so:
#
On 3/4/2009 10:19 AM, Brian Evans - Postfix List wrote:
Robert A. Ober wrote:
On 3/4/2009 9:56 AM, Scent-Sations Support wrote:
Robert A. Ober wrote:
On 3/4/2009 9:48 AM, Charles Marcus wrote:
No, postfix -n does not return anything except a posfix generated
error. It
Jacqui Caren:
Wietse Venema wrote:
Although the idea of proactive botnet detection has merit, building
delays into the SMTPD process is very problematic. It causes Postfix
to waste more time on bogus SMTP clients, so that it reaches the
all SMTP servers busy condition sooner.
I thought
On 3/4/2009 12:26 PM, Victor Duchovni wrote:
Dovecot has added two lines of text to the beginning output of dovecot
-n that could possibly save some time with troubleshooting...
It adds the version on the first line, and OS/platform info on the
second line, like so:
# 1.1.11:
On 4-Mar-2009, at 09:22, Wietse Venema wrote:
Charles Marcus:
Dovecot has added two lines of text to the beginning output of
dovecot
-n that could possibly save some time with troubleshooting...
It adds the version on the first line, and OS/platform info on the
second line, like so:
#
On Wed, Mar 04, 2009 at 10:15:05AM +0100, Santiago Romero wrote:
/etc/postfix/master.cf
slow unix - - - - - smtp
-o syslog_name=postfix-slow
/etc/postfix/main.cf
# Special slow transport:
slow_destination_recipient_limit=1
A really BAD
Santiago Romero:
Stracing qmgr process for a while (before restarting postfix), showed
lots of lines like:
time(NULL) = 1236156322
epoll_ctl(8, EPOLL_CTL_DEL, 128, {EPOLLIN, {u32=128,
u64=13252642876283682944}}) = 0
fcntl64(128, F_GETFL) =
On 3/4/2009 11:54 AM, Brian Evans - Postfix List wrote:
Robert A. Ober wrote:
On 3/4/2009 10:19 AM, Brian Evans - Postfix List wrote:
Robert A. Ober wrote
vi /etc/sysconfig/saslauthd :
FYI: saslauthd is Cyrus not Dovecot
There is some issue with Mandriva
Victor Duchovni:
Is it the queue manager that's burning CPU? Nothing too interesting
here.
Yes, according to this:
PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEMTIME+ COMMAND
26926 postfix 20 0 5840 2552 1792 R 43 0.3 276:51.22 qmgr
There needs to be a safety check for the
On 3/4/2009 11:54 AM, Brian Evans - Postfix List wrote:
Robert A. Ober wrote:
On 3/4/2009 10:19 AM, Brian Evans - Postfix List wrote:
Robert A. Ober wrote
vi /etc/sysconfig/saslauthd :
FYI: saslauthd is Cyrus not Dovecot
There is some issue with Mandriva
On 3/4/2009 12:32 PM, Robert A. Ober wrote:
On 3/4/2009 11:54 AM, Brian Evans - Postfix List wrote:
Robert A. Ober wrote:
On 3/4/2009 10:19 AM, Brian Evans - Postfix List wrote:
Robert A. Ober wrote
vi /etc/sysconfig/saslauthd :
FYI: saslauthd is Cyrus not Dovecot
Wietse Venema wrote:
Charles Marcus:
Dovecot has added two lines of text to the beginning output of dovecot
-n that could possibly save some time with troubleshooting...
It adds the version on the first line, and OS/platform info on the
second line, like so:
# 1.1.11:
ok thanks wietse!
Evelio Vila:
so I would like to modify the return_attribute to pass postfix only
the user
part of the mail field.
See: man ldap_table | less +/result_format
Also, could several queries can be combined to form the desired
result?
You can't make multiple queries per
Victor Duchovni:
slow_destination_recipient_limit=1
slow_destination_concurrency_limit=1
I wonder if the problem recurs when these are changed. But let's
first swap new and old queue managers.
Wietse
At 12:52 PM 3/4/2009, Charles Marcus wrote:
# 1.1.11: /etc/dovecot/dovecot.conf
# OS: Linux 2.6.23-gentoo-r9 x86_64 Gentoo Base System release 1.12.11.1
If the output is name =value then could the output just be
conf = 1.1.11: /etc/dovecot/dovecot.conf
OS = Linux 2.6.23-gentoo-r9 x86_64
On Wed March 4 2009 08:39:37 Victor Duchovni wrote:
If I recall correctly the OP reported using Postfix 2.2 and should
see:
http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#smtpd_sasl_type
attempts to use Dovecot SASL auth with Postfix 2.2 are unlikely to
get very far.
I did it, but I cheated. I
LuKreme:
On 4-Mar-2009, at 09:22, Wietse Venema wrote:
Charles Marcus:
Dovecot has added two lines of text to the beginning output of
dovecot
-n that could possibly save some time with troubleshooting...
It adds the version on the first line, and OS/platform info on the
second
Robert A. Ober wrote:
On 3/4/2009 12:32 PM, Robert A. Ober wrote:
On 3/4/2009 11:54 AM, Brian Evans - Postfix List wrote:
FYI: saslauthd is Cyrus not Dovecot
Right and that means the type is Cyrus?
Robert
You seem to have had Cyrus working, but want to break it to try to use
Dovecot.
On 4-Mar-2009, at 11:54, Wietse Venema wrote:
postconf -n does not list parameters unless they are set in
main.cf. The simplicity of the tool makes it useful for building
into other tools. If we start making random exceptions then we get
on a slippery slope (why stop with mail_version? why not
On 3/4/2009 1:06 PM, Brian Evans - Postfix List wrote:
Robert A. Ober wrote:
On 3/4/2009 12:32 PM, Robert A. Ober wrote:
On 3/4/2009 11:54 AM, Brian Evans - Postfix List wrote:
FYI: saslauthd is Cyrus not Dovecot
Right and that means the type is
On Wed March 4 2009 08:48:18 Paweł Leśniak wrote:
But then we come to definition of spam. It's in simple words unwanted
message.
Too simple, and not correct. The true definition of spam is UBE:
unsolicited bulk email. Most spammers put out messages that a tiny
percentage of
Emmanuel Seyman wrote, at 03/04/2009 02:03 PM:
What's the best way to do this? If I install SA on the first domain
and remove the lists.example.org MX, spammers will still be able to
send spam to it directly. Is setting up SA on both machines the simplest
way to go?
It's certainly more
Hi,
We are having problems sending email to a particular site on the internet
that uses SpamAssassin to filter for spam. They send me back the headers on
a particular message and here is the spam portion:
X-Spam-Flag: YES
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.0 (2007-05-01) on
I was just talking about something that would make it easier when
someone was asking for help on the list... I don't think the above will
quite accomplish that...
In many cases (I'm not gonna do statistics) new users do not post their
questions correctly - often we can see 2nd message in
On 3/4/2009 10:05 AM, Miguel Da Silva - Centro de Matemática wrote:
Victor Duchovni escribió:
On Wed, Mar 04, 2009 at 09:35:38AM -0200, Miguel Da Silva - Centro de
Matem?tica wrote:
The user was not relaying: mail was sent to a domain you are
responsible
for, so this was not blocked by
On 3/4/2009, PaweB Le[niak (warl...@lesniakowie.com) wrote:
Looking at first email in thread carefully you'd see that Dave has
(or had) problem with spam sent from j...@foo.com to j...@foo.com. And
that's the case where authentication will do the job perfectly - IMHO
way better then zen.
On 3/4/2009 2:36 PM, Paweł Leśniak wrote:
I was just talking about something that would make it easier when
someone was asking for help on the list... I don't think the above will
quite accomplish that...
In many cases (I'm not gonna do statistics) new users do not post their
questions
What controls escaping From in the body of a mail message if it's
at the start of a line? Since I've switched everyone over to Maildir,
it seems silly to do this anymore, but I can't find the setting. In
fact, I'm not even sure it's in postfix at all.
RTFM replies preferred, just say
Robert A. Ober wrote:
On 3/4/2009 1:06 PM, Brian Evans - Postfix List wrote:
Robert A. Ober wrote:
On 3/4/2009 12:32 PM, Robert A. Ober wrote:
On 3/4/2009 11:54 AM, Brian Evans - Postfix List wrote:
FYI: saslauthd is Cyrus not Dovecot
Right
I'm trying to implement a white list with check_sender_access in
smtpd_recipient_restrictions. The problem I'm running into is that the
submission port is requiring TLS even when I have set
smtpd_enforce_tls=no and smtp_enfoce_tls=no in main.cf and specified
them as options for the submission
W dniu 2009-03-04 20:53, Charles Marcus pisze:
Irrelevant. There is nothing wrong with simplifying things...
Simplifying does not mean changing behavior. As Wietse said, postconf -n
shows only setting from main.cf. So adding values from outside main.cf
is not simplifying at all.
By your
Steve Crawford wrote:
While we do not manage a mailing list in the traditional sense, we do
send a lot of emails (daily/weekly/monthly reports, instant-alert
messages, etc.) where using VERP to track bounces could prove useful.
We run numerous projects with varying requirements and the
On 3/4/2009, PaweB Le[niak (warl...@lesniakowie.com) wrote:
Looking at first email in thread carefully you'd see that Dave has
(or had) problem with spam sent from j...@foo.com to j...@foo.com. And
that's the case where authentication will do the job perfectly - IMHO
way better then zen.
On 4-Mar-2009, at 12:33, Rob Tanner wrote:
X-Spam-Flag: YES
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.0 (2007-05-01) on
microthunder.com
They really *really* need to update their two-year old SA install.
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: Yes, score=4.4 required=4.0
They really *REALLY*
J.P. Trosclair wrote:
I'm trying to implement a white list with check_sender_access in
smtpd_recipient_restrictions. The problem I'm running into is that the
submission port is requiring TLS even when I have set
smtpd_enforce_tls=no and smtp_enfoce_tls=no in main.cf and specified
them as
I have Postfix 2.1 on Freebsd 4.10 and am having trouble blocking email
from a domain.
Here is a snipet of the postqueue -p:
DF6A927D 3512 Tue Mar 3 18:42:35 MAILER-DAEMON
(connect to mx1.mail.yahoo.co.jp[124.83.183.240]: server dropped
connection without sending the initial SMTP
Carlos Williams wrote:
Thanks for that info. Can someone also comment on this? I asked a
friend via email and this was his response to the same issue:
**
I used nslookup to verify the address your queue is showing, and it
does correspond to je.jfcom.mil. But a
On 4-Mar-2009, at 13:08, J.P. Trosclair wrote:
submission inet n - - - - smtpd
-o smtpd_tls_security_level=encrypt
Why?
--
If I were you boys, I wouldn't talk or even think about women.
T'aint good for your health.
Jim McIver wrote:
I have Postfix 2.1 on Freebsd 4.10 and am having trouble blocking
email from a domain.
Postfix 2.1 is ancient. Recommend an upgrade as some things I mention
may require 2.2 or 2.3 or higher.
Here is a snipet of the postqueue -p:
DF6A927D 3512 Tue Mar 3 18:42:35
W dniu 2009-03-04 21:32, Jim McIver pisze:
I have Postfix 2.1 on Freebsd 4.10 and am having trouble blocking
email from a domain.
Here is a snipet of the postqueue -p:
DF6A927D 3512 Tue Mar 3 18:42:35 MAILER-DAEMON
(connect to mx1.mail.yahoo.co.jp[124.83.183.240]: server dropped
On 4-Mar-2009, at 13:32, Jim McIver wrote:
they just pile up in the postqueue and I'd like to keep the
postqueue -p cleaned out.
Snippet from maillog:
Mar 4 00:09:21 mail postfix/smtpd[36633]: NOQUEUE: reject: RCPT
from unknown[89.218.164.251]: 554 u...@domain.com: Sender address
LuKreme wrote:
On 4-Mar-2009, at 13:08, J.P. Trosclair wrote:
submission inet n - - - - smtpd
-o smtpd_tls_security_level=encrypt
Why?
I didn't explicitly add it. It was a left over from the default
master.cf for the postfix package on debian 5.0. It's gone
J.P. Trosclair wrote, at 03/04/2009 04:05 PM:
LuKreme wrote:
On 4-Mar-2009, at 13:08, J.P. Trosclair wrote:
submission inet n - - - - smtpd
-o smtpd_tls_security_level=encrypt
Why?
I didn't explicitly add it. It was a left over from the default
master.cf
Ok - now that I've fixed my idiotic routing errors (don't have two NIC's
on the same network unless you know what you're doing - which I clearly
don't!), I can get back to Postfix.
From my prior configuration questions in ages past, I have been trying
to make most of my changes in master.cf,
Hello,
I am in the process of setting up an internal mail server
(carver-test.mydomain.local) using postfix, dovecot and squirrel mail.
I want the users of this system only be able send mail to a few users in
mydomain.com
I imagine that there is an easy way to map this to a file, but I can't
Paweł Leśniak a écrit :
W dniu 2009-03-03 18:41, Noel Jones pisze:
Some legit reminder type services, some meeting notifications, and
other legit mail might arrive with you as the sender. Maybe not best
practices, but it's legit mail and such a policy will reject it.
Why would someone want
Jorey Bump wrote:
Put it back. smtpd_enforce_tls is deprecated since Postfix 2.3 and
smtpd_tls_security_level should be used instead.
I'll research the smtpd_tls_security_level option further. It didn't
present a problem until I started working on this specific feature with
the white lists.
My mistake, the ones piling up in postqueue -p are the yahoo.co.jp. The
u...@domain.com is just listed in the maillog and it's a bogus email
address I'd like not to receive email from.
-jm
LuKreme wrote:
On 4-Mar-2009, at 13:32, Jim McIver wrote:
they just pile up in the postqueue and I'd
My mistake. The u...@domain.com is in the maillog. yahoo.co.jp is in
postqueue -p
-jm
Paweł Leśniak wrote:
W dniu 2009-03-04 21:32, Jim McIver pisze:
I have Postfix 2.1 on Freebsd 4.10 and am having trouble blocking
email from a domain.
Here is a snipet of the postqueue -p:
DF6A927D
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I need to change email sent by a user from one domain (a.com) so that
clicking Reply will reply to him at b.com. (a.com isn't always reliable,
and I admin b.com, among other reasons.)
Google got me to postfix.org's documentation on generic maps. I'm
On 3/4/2009 1:57 PM, Brian Evans - Postfix List wrote:
Robert A. Ober wrote:
On 3/4/2009 1:06 PM, Brian Evans - Postfix List wrote:
Robert A. Ober wrote:
On 3/4/2009 12:32 PM, Robert A. Ober wrote:
On 3/4/2009 11:54 AM, Brian Evans - Postfix List wrote:
In looking at the file in xxx/deferred, my mailserver is trying to
return an undelivable message and it looks like there is something wrong
with the site. said: 557 Invalid routingNCrequest - domain in
BLACK LIST.
Basically I think the site is a spammer and they are blacklisted. How
can I
Carver Banks wrote:
Hello,
I am in the process of setting up an internal mail server
(carver-test.mydomain.local) using postfix, dovecot and squirrel mail.
I want the users of this system only be able send mail to a few users in
mydomain.com
I imagine that there is an easy way to map this to a
On 4-Mar-2009, at 14:33, Jorey Bump wrote:
smtpd_tls_security_level should be used instead.
Not if you don't want to force TLS on the submission port it shouldn't.
On 4-Mar-2009, at 13:21, Brian Evans - Postfix List wrote:
*encrypt*
Mandatory TLS encryption: announce STARTTLS support to
LuKreme a écrit :
What controls escaping From in the body of a mail message if it's at
the start of a line? Since I've switched everyone over to Maildir, it
seems silly to do this anymore, but I can't find the setting. In fact,
I'm not even sure it's in postfix at all.
look at what you use
Jim McIver wrote:
In looking at the file in xxx/deferred, my mailserver is trying to
return an undelivable message and it looks like there is something wrong
with the site. said: 557 Invalid routingNCrequest - domain in
BLACK LIST.
Basically I think the site is a spammer and they are
Daniel L. Miller a écrit :
Ok - now that I've fixed my idiotic routing errors (don't have two NIC's
on the same network unless you know what you're doing - which I clearly
don't!), I can get back to Postfix.
From my prior configuration questions in ages past, I have been trying
to make most
Santiago Romero:
Wietse Venema escribi?:
Santiago Romero:
I case it happens again ... Where or what should I take a look? At OS
level (disk or network I/O, processes...) I didn't see anything before
the postfix restart...
Try ``strace -o filename -p pid'' or the
Daniel L. Miller wrote:
Ok - now that I've fixed my idiotic routing errors (don't have two NIC's
on the same network unless you know what you're doing - which I clearly
don't!), I can get back to Postfix.
From my prior configuration questions in ages past, I have been trying
to make most of
Hello,
I'm having an issue with mail being blocked (I think) and I was hoping that
someone here would give me an idea on where to get started.
here's the situation. (Made up names)
server is postfix with amavis-new, spam-assassin and dovecot. logs are fairly
verbose.
Alice
Noel,
Guess I'm confused. I have a relay_recipient and recipient_access files
listing only valid user's email addresses for my company.
ie..
relay_recipients
bg...@lmtribune.com any_value
bi...@lmtribune.com any_value
bjohn...@lmtribune.com any_value
recipient_access
Ray wrote:
Hello,
I'm having an issue with mail being blocked (I think) and I was hoping that
someone here would give me an idea on where to get started.
here's the situation. (Made up names)
server is postfix with amavis-new, spam-assassin and dovecot. logs are fairly
verbose.
Alice
Noel Jones wrote:
Define content_filter in main.cf pointing to the spam processing
machine, define a new smtpd listener in master.cf listening on a
different port.
http://www.postfix.org/FILTER_README.html
Amavisd-new is software often used as a postfix content_filter. Even
if you're using
Thanks for your feedback. I do have $myhostname defined and you've
confirmed what I thought. It's their issue and they need to fix it.
Again, thanks.
-- Rob
On 3/4/09 12:19 PM, LuKreme krem...@kreme.com wrote:
On 4-Mar-2009, at 12:33, Rob Tanner wrote:
X-Spam-Flag: YES
-Original Message-
From: owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org [mailto:owner-postfix-
us...@postfix.org] On Behalf Of Noel Jones
Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 2:22 PM
To: postfix-users@postfix.org
Subject: Re: restricting who can be sent to.
Carver Banks wrote:
Hello,
I am in the
mouss wrote:
to setup a Postfix listener for local SMTP connections, which will then
forward to a relayhost for spam processing (in this case, primarily
auto-whitelisting). That relayhost will then send the message back to
Postfix on another connection, and THAT listener will not have a
On Wednesday 04 March 2009 16:12:32 Terry Carmen wrote:
Ray wrote:
Hello,
I'm having an issue with mail being blocked (I think) and I was hoping
that someone here would give me an idea on where to get started.
here's the situation. (Made up names)
server is postfix with amavis-new,
Please don't top-post. Thank you.
On Wed March 4 2009 17:10:49 Jim McIver wrote:
Guess I'm confused. I have a relay_recipient and recipient_access
files listing only valid user's email addresses for my company.
ie..
relay_recipients
bg...@lmtribune.com any_value
bi...@lmtribune.com
On Thursday, March 05, 2009 at 00:26 CET,
Ray r...@stilltech.net wrote:
On Wednesday 04 March 2009 16:12:32 Terry Carmen wrote:
Ray wrote:
Alice (al...@example.com) sends Bob an Email (b...@myserver.com) CC
(b...@3rdserver.com) I run myserver.com. message goes through to
On Wed March 4 2009 17:26:01 Ray wrote:
On Wednesday 04 March 2009 16:12:32 Terry Carmen wrote:
Ray wrote:
Hello,
I'm having an issue with mail being blocked (I think) and I was
hoping that someone here would give me an idea on where to get
started.
here's the situation. (Made
1 - 100 of 133 matches
Mail list logo
