Noel Jones a écrit :
Ivan Ricotti wrote:
Hi,
thanks for your reply.
Brian Evans - Postfix List wrote:
Look a few lines above this. Why did you accept mail for a non-existent
user?
But I do *not* accept mail for non-existent users:
Mar 26 09:27:11 athene postfix/smtpd[29704]: NOQUEUE:
Ross Tsolakidis a écrit :
I had to resort to installing postfix-policyd to rate limit them.
(Make sure you have Squirrel use auth so regardless of forged-from
lines, you still rate limit accounts).
I've just been playing with postfix-policyd (debian package 1.80).
The only way I could get
Bryce Nesbitt a écrit :
Noel Jones wrote:
You can't pipe to newaliases.
You can use a proto file with comments and some script to create the
input file that newaliases requires. This seems a natural for a
Makefile.
-- Noel Jones
I was aiming for something that was no mistakes proof for
On 3/26/2009, Noel Jones (njo...@megan.vbhcs.org) wrote:
(A better design is to have a separate IP for official mail and
another IP used for client internet access. Then client misbehavior
doesn't affect the mail system. of course that means you must have
more than one IP...)
I like this
Hello,
Noel Jones wrote:
The above is the result of a postfix reject_unverified_recipient check.
The double_bounce entries you see are address probes. In other words,
these are not in any way related to your problem.
oook, thanks!
Since you so far haven't shown anything remotely
Thanks for the quick response and sorry I missed that. Here's the output
from postfinger-1.30 without parameters:
--System Parameters--
mail_version = 2.5.6
hostname = davserver
uname = Linux davserver 2.6.28-gentoo-r4 #1 SMP Thu Mar 19 22:24:29 GMT
2009 i686 Intel(R) Pentium(R) 4 CPU 2.66GHz
Hi Steffen
we use quite a similar config, but instead of mysql:, we use proxy:ldap:
contrasting to your config we have:
virtual_transport = virtual
suomi
Steffen Schaumburg wrote:
Thanks for the quick response and sorry I missed that. Here's the output
from postfinger-1.30 without
dovecot unix - n n - - pipe
flags=DRhu user=mail:mail argv=/usr/libexec/dovecot/deliver -f
${sender}
-d ${recipient}
add in -e just before -d
I tried this first, same result.
On Fri, 27 Mar 2009 22:17:01 +1000 (EST), Res r...@ausics.net wrote:
On Fri,
On Fri, 27 Mar 2009 09:10:42 -0400, Brian Evans - Postfix List
grkni...@scent-team.com wrote:
Steffen Schaumburg wrote:
Thanks for the quick response and sorry I missed that. Here's the output
from postfinger-1.30 without parameters:
--System Parameters--
mail_version = 2.5.6
hostname =
Steffen Schaumburg wrote:
On Fri, 27 Mar 2009 09:10:42 -0400, Brian Evans - Postfix List
grkni...@scent-team.com wrote:
Steffen Schaumburg wrote:
Thanks for the quick response and sorry I missed that. Here's the output
from postfinger-1.30 without parameters:
--System Parameters--
Sorry i got those outputs mixed up and apologies for spamming the list but
I didn't want to mix my replies to different mails all into one mail to
avoid confusion. Anyways here's the correct outputs:
postmap -q use...@schaumburger.info
mysql:/etc/postfix/mysql_virtual_alias_maps.cf gives
Thanks for the quick response and sorry I missed that. Here's the
output
from postfinger-1.30 without parameters:
--System Parameters--
mail_version = 2.5.6
hostname = davserver
uname = Linux davserver 2.6.28-gentoo-r4 #1 SMP Thu Mar 19 22:24:29
GMT
2009 i686 Intel(R) Pentium(R) 4 CPU
Steffen Schaumburg wrote:
Does a mail sent to stef...@schaumburger.info succeed?
No. I tried from this address (using roundcube webmail which simply says
failed) as well as via SMTP on the server itself (ie. SMTP to
schaumburger.info to send a mail to stef...@schaumburger.info, gives
The only thing postfix put in my log is the startup:
Mar 27 13:46:40 davserver postfix/postfix-script[24448]: starting the
Postfix mail system
Mar 27 13:46:40 davserver postfix/master[24449]: daemon started --
version
2.5.6, configuration /etc/postfix
I know you said non-verbose, but since
Hi,
I have been running Postfix 2.5.x on a linux server using virtual
domains with PostgreSQL for a while now and I've just implemented a
basic check_sender_access policy using a hash. Everything works fine,
but now I would like to convert this to an SQL statement and store the
data in the
JohnD wrote:
Hi,
I have been running Postfix 2.5.x on a linux server using virtual
domains with PostgreSQL for a while now and I've just implemented a
basic check_sender_access policy using a hash. Everything works fine,
but now I would like to convert this to an SQL statement and store the
Hi Steffen,
The following are links I did use before to create a
postfix.dovecot.mysql system, but on Fedora, but maybe some help.
http://wiki.rbcollins.net/index.php/Postfix_backend_server#Postfix.2BMySQL.2BDovecot.2BSquirrelMail.2BSpamAssassin.2BAmavisd-new.2BClamAV_on_Fedora_Core_5|RB
Charles Marcus wrote:
On 3/26/2009, Noel Jones (njo...@megan.vbhcs.org) wrote:
(A better design is to have a separate IP for official mail and
another IP used for client internet access. Then client misbehavior
doesn't affect the mail system. of course that means you must have
more than one
On 26-Mar-2009, at 18:06, Sahil Tandon wrote:
On Thu, 26 Mar 2009, LuKreme wrote:
I have in my postffix helo checks, perhaps a bad idea,
[some checks up here that reject]
/^postmaster\@/ OK
/^abuse\@/ OK
Why do these email address patterns appear in a HELO access(5) map?
Because 9
* LuKreme krem...@kreme.com:
On 26-Mar-2009, at 18:06, Sahil Tandon wrote:
On Thu, 26 Mar 2009, LuKreme wrote:
I have in my postffix helo checks, perhaps a bad idea,
[some checks up here that reject]
/^postmaster\@/ OK
/^abuse\@/ OK
Why do these email address patterns appear in a
I just thoght that there is a way to pass message to filter right before
passing it to mailbox_command, deliver in my case.
D.
1- if it's ok to filter mail if one of the recipient is local
(eventhough other recipients may belong to other domains), you can use
check_recipient_access:
On 26-Mar-2009, at 18:23, Bryce Nesbitt wrote:
Would anyone else appreciate end of line comments, as an extension to
/etc/aliases and *.pcre? What character should introduce such
comments?
Actually? No. I find end-of-line comments to be far more trouble
than they are worth.
# 20090101
On 27-Mar-2009, at 09:57, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
* LuKreme krem...@kreme.com:
On 26-Mar-2009, at 18:06, Sahil Tandon wrote:
On Thu, 26 Mar 2009, LuKreme wrote:
I have in my postffix helo checks, perhaps a bad idea,
[some checks up here that reject]
/^postmaster\@/ OK
/^abuse\@/ OK
Magnus Bäck wrote:
On Thursday, March 26, 2009 at 21:48 CET,
Asai a...@globalchangemusic.org wrote:
From /var/log/maillog, one example of the problem:
Mar 26 11:58:18 triata postfix/smtpd[25357]: NOQUEUE: reject: RCPT from
unknown[63.229.177.226]: 554 5.7.1 recipi...@domain.com:
On Mar 27, 2009, at 12:18 PM, LuKreme krem...@kreme.com wrote:
On 27-Mar-2009, at 09:57, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
* LuKreme krem...@kreme.com:
On 26-Mar-2009, at 18:06, Sahil Tandon wrote:
On Thu, 26 Mar 2009, LuKreme wrote:
I have in my postffix helo checks, perhaps a bad idea,
[some
Is the a readme or other document that that outlines an optimal order
for smtp_*_restrictions.
TIA
JLA
Is the a readme or other document that that outlines an optimal order
for smtp_*_restrictions.
Sorry, I should have been a little more specific, I am talking about the
order of the parameters with in a class of restriction (eg.
smtp_recipient_restrictions), not the order of the restriction
KLaM Postmaster wrote:
Is the a readme or other document that that outlines an optimal order
for smtp_*_restrictions.
TIA
JLA
http://www.postfix.org/SMTPD_ACCESS_README.html#lists
KLaM Postmaster wrote:
Is the a readme or other document that that outlines an optimal order
for smtp_*_restrictions.
Sorry, I should have been a little more specific, I am talking about the
order of the parameters with in a class of restriction (eg.
smtp_recipient_restrictions), not the
On Mar 27, 2009, at 1:32 PM, KLaM Postmaster postmas...@klam.ca wrote:
Is the a readme or other document that that outlines an optimal order
for smtp_*_restrictions.
Sorry, I should have been a little more specific, I am talking about
the
order of the parameters with in a class of
Hi:
On Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 6:05 PM, Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org wrote:
carconni:
Hi,
I've been digging around and I haven't been able to find what I'm
really looking for so I thought I'd go straight to the ones who know.
Can Postfix be run in a clustered environment (ie: multiple
Jose Perez:
Hi:
On Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 6:05 PM, Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org wrote:
carconni:
Hi,
I've been digging around and I haven't been able to find what I'm
really looking for so I thought I'd go straight to the ones who know.
Can Postfix be run in a clustered
Wietse Venema:
Jose Perez:
Hi:
On Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 6:05 PM, Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org wrote:
carconni:
Hi,
I've been digging around and I haven't been able to find what I'm
really looking for so I thought I'd go straight to the ones who know.
Can Postfix
LuKreme a écrit :
On 27-Mar-2009, at 09:57, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
* LuKreme krem...@kreme.com:
On 26-Mar-2009, at 18:06, Sahil Tandon wrote:
On Thu, 26 Mar 2009, LuKreme wrote:
I have in my postffix helo checks, perhaps a bad idea,
[some checks up here that reject]
/^postmaster\@/ OK
Steffen Schaumburg a écrit :
The only thing postfix put in my log is the startup:
Mar 27 13:46:40 davserver postfix/postfix-script[24448]: starting the
Postfix mail system
Mar 27 13:46:40 davserver postfix/master[24449]: daemon started --
version
2.5.6, configuration /etc/postfix
I know
KLaM Postmaster a écrit :
Is the a readme or other document that that outlines an optimal order
for smtp_*_restrictions.
Sorry, I should have been a little more specific, I am talking about the
order of the parameters with in a class of restriction (eg.
smtp_recipient_restrictions), not
Res wrote:
Hi,
I have an internal requirement to deny access to an email address,
which I'd like to do via access, however, we'd also like to accept
that message for storage somewhere, I was thinking of the access BCC
method, but then I need to also send a 5xx message in their connect
Res wrote:
Hi Terry,
On Fri, 27 Mar 2009, Terry Carmen wrote:
I have an internal requirement to deny access to an email address,
which I'd like to do via access, however, we'd also like to accept
that message for storage somewhere, I was thinking of the access BCC
method, but then I need to
38 matches
Mail list logo
