On Wed April 22 2009 17:36:56 Harsh Jain wrote:
> I am choosing the following settings to be on the safe side, so as
> to not get blocked by any ISP for being aggressive.
I would suggest, rather, that you simply not send any unsolicited bulk
email. Use industry standards for confirmation of Web
On 4/22/2009 12:17 PM, Mark Martinec wrote:
Jeff,
One more thing I noticed today also. All messages which have the "+" in
the e-mail are sent to Dovecot's Deliver twice. So, I receive the
message twice in the folder. All other messages are only sent to
Deliver once. Any idea what I have
* wiskbr...@hotmail.com :
> Does this mean that if a remote site has this set to 450 that I will
> keep trying for 5 days, or however long my "maximal_queue_lifetime" is
> set for?
Exactly.
> What do I do in the case of misconfigured (are they?) MTA's?
Wait 5 days. Or contact the idiot sysadmin
* wiskbr...@hotmail.com :
> What about for "undeliverable address: unknown user:"? I set
> delay_warning_time to 120m and after 2 hours never received any
> warnings at all that my email was rejected due to being sent to an
> undeliverable address, user unknown in this case.
Logs?
> Finally, p
Hi,
I am choosing the following settings to be on the safe side, so as to
not get blocked by any ISP for being aggressive.
- We expect to deliver around 50K mails per day.
- We do not want to reattempt delivery of bounced or failed deliveries.
Please let me know if this won't affect us otherwise
Mark Johnson wrote:
Finally, I figure out under mynetwork, I need to add 127.0.0.0 and it works now.
Reading the documentation would have made this much easier to
figure out.
http://www.postfix.org/BASIC_CONFIGURATION_README.html#relay_from
http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#mynetworks
Finally, I figure out under mynetwork, I need to add 127.0.0.0 and it works now.
For transport table /eetc/postfix/transprot
I wonder the format will like this and the mail will forward to this server?
mydomain.comsmtp: 192.168.1.155
myanotherone.comsmtp: 192.168.1.155
onedomain.com
Ralf, here is another one for your list of Cisco PIX and ASA
problems with inspection of a SMTP protocol (actually, parsing
of a mail header section):
http://www.arschkrebs.de/postfix/postfix_cisco_pix_bugs.shtml
CSCsy28792
SMTP session disconnects due to improper parsing of a DKIM header fie
On 4/22/2009, wiskbr...@hotmail.com (wiskbr...@hotmail.com) wrote:
> Does this mean that if a remote site has this set to 450 that I will
> keep trying for 5 days, or however long my "maximal_queue_lifetime"
> is set for?
Yes...
> What do I do in the case of misconfigured (are they?) MTA's?
All
Jeff,
> >> One more thing I noticed today also. All messages which have the "+" in
> >> the e-mail are sent to Dovecot's Deliver twice. So, I receive the
> >> message twice in the folder. All other messages are only sent to
> >> Deliver once. Any idea what I have configured wrong for the messa
The purpose for the postfix is only for mail relay.
Also after I comment out #mynetwork = 192.168.1.100, 192.168.1.x,192.168.1.10x
and I can use the command cat maillog | mail m...@x.com -s maillog to send
mail out.
--- On Wed, 4/22/09, Victor Duchovni wrote:
> From: Victor Duchovni
>
Jørn,
> As I said in the first email, I control both ends (both the sender- and
> the receiver-server). But I do not control neither network-connectivity
> or Internet-connectivity at either sites.
>
> I did try turning of Window Scaling at both ends, but it did not help at
> all. It still won't d
>> From: cmar...@...
>
>> On 4/22/2009, wiskbr...@... (wiskbr...@...) wrote:
>>> What about for "undeliverable address: unknown user:"? I set
>>> delay_warning_time to 120m and after 2 hours never received any
>>> warnings at all that my email was rejected due to being sent to an
>>> undeliverabl
On Wed, 22 Apr 2009, Rick Duval wrote:
I have Postfix installed as part of a Virtualmin installation and I'm
having some emails reject because of size (so the reject says, pasted
below logs from the sending server)
2009-04-22 11:33:58 1LweSG-0004iM-Sn ** rdu...@csm-ltd.com
R=deliver_clean T=re
See message_size_limit and its default value:
http://www.postfix.org/resource.html
On Apr 22, 2009, at 8:26 PM, Rick Duval wrote:
I have Postfix installed as part of a Virtualmin installation and I'm
having some emails reject because of size (so the reject says, pasted
below logs from the send
I have Postfix installed as part of a Virtualmin installation and I'm
having some emails reject because of size (so the reject says, pasted
below logs from the sending server)
2009-04-22 11:33:58 1LweSG-0004iM-Sn ** rdu...@csm-ltd.com
R=deliver_clean T=remote_smtp: SMTP error from
remote mail ser
> From: cmar...@...
> On 4/22/2009, wiskbr...@... (wiskbr...@...) wrote:
>> What about for "undeliverable address: unknown user:"? I set
>> delay_warning_time to 120m and after 2 hours never received any
>> warnings at all that my email was rejected due to being sent to an
>> undeliverable addres
On 4/22/2009, wiskbr...@hotmail.com (wiskbr...@hotmail.com) wrote:
> What about for "undeliverable address: unknown user:"? I set
> delay_warning_time to 120m and after 2 hours never received any
> warnings at all that my email was rejected due to being sent to an
> undeliverable address, user unk
> From: ralf.hildebra...@...
> * wiskbr...@... :
>>
>>
>> Hello;
>>
>> My users NDR's are not arriving until the 5 day retry period has lapsed,
>> creating issues whereby time critical emails are not getting out due to
>> their unawareness of this matter.
>
> Normal in certain cases (typoed do
On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 10:14:24AM -0700, Mark Johnson wrote:
> maximal_queue_lifetime = 5h
This looks rather unwise, unless you never send to Internet domains.
> minimal_backoff_time = 1000s
Just delete from main.cf and use the default value.
> mydestination = $myhostname, localhost.$mydomain
* wiskbr...@hotmail.com :
>
>
> Hello;
>
> My users NDR's are not arriving until the 5 day retry period has lapsed,
> creating issues whereby time critical emails are not getting out due to their
> unawareness of this matter.
Normal in certain cases (typoed domains, mostly).
Why not use:
dela
Here you go:
alias_database = hash:/etc/aliases
alias_maps = hash:/etc/aliases
command_directory = /usr/sbin
config_directory = /etc/postfix
daemon_directory = /usr/libexec/postfix
debug_peer_level = 2
delay_warning_time = 4h
html_directory = no
inet_interfaces = all
mail_owner = postfix
mailq_pat
Steve Head:
> One difference I can see, when doing a postcat of a queue file of a
> smaller list which also has a deferred recipient.
> [snip]
> sender: owner-@infoxchange.net.au
> named_attribute: rewrite_context=local
> original_recipient: -mj-list
> done_recipient: $us...@infoxchange.net
J?rn Odberg:
> Would I need to do this at the sender or the receiver? Or both ends?
You can run tcpdump at one end first. If we can't figure out what
is happening, then we may also need the other end to see if
something is messing around with the packets.
Some "firewalls" have incomplete TCP impl
> From: victor.ducho...@...
> On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 11:57:27AM -0400, wiskbr...@... wrote:
>
>> My users NDR's are not arriving until the 5 day retry period has lapsed,
>
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5321#section-4.5.4.1
Thanks, I've been needing to re-read lots of other RFC's lately :-(
>
On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 09:12:04AM -0700, Mark Johnson wrote:
> I am newbie with Postfix and have couple questions:
>
> 1. Allow relay from trusted servers within same network (using IP
> address) How can I do that?
http://www.postfix.org/BASIC_CONFIGURATION_README.html#relay_from
> I tried
2009/4/23 Mark Johnson :
> 1. Allow relay from trusted servers within same network (using IP address)
> How can I do that? I tried this with mynetworks = 192.168.1.100,
> 192.168.1.102, 192.168.1.103 and it won't work. It's not even able to send
> mail out from postfix itself.
> 2. With Sendmail
All,
I am newbie with Postfix and have couple questions:
1. Allow relay from trusted servers within same network (using IP address) How
can I do that? I tried this with mynetworks = 192.168.1.100, 192.168.1.102,
192.168.1.103 and it won't work. It's not even able to send mail out from
postfix
On 4/22/2009 11:57 AM, wiskbr...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
> Hello;
>
> My users NDR's are not arriving until the 5 day retry period has lapsed,
> creating issues whereby time critical emails are not getting out due to their
> unawareness of this matter.
>
> I've tried several changes in my main.cf
On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 11:57:27AM -0400, wiskbr...@hotmail.com wrote:
> My users NDR's are not arriving until the 5 day retry period has lapsed,
http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5321#section-4.5.4.1
> creating issues whereby time critical emails are not getting out due to
> their unawareness o
Hello;
My users NDR's are not arriving until the 5 day retry period has lapsed,
creating issues whereby time critical emails are not getting out due to their
unawareness of this matter.
I've tried several changes in my main.cf, none seem to do the trick for me.
Here is some of my postconf ou
On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 11:57:30PM +1000, Barney Desmond wrote:
> > As I said in the first email, I control both ends (both the sender- and the
> > receiver-server). But I do not control neither network-connectivity or
> > Internet-connectivity at either sites.
> >
> > I did try turning of Window
2009/4/22 Jørn Odberg :
> As I said in the first email, I control both ends (both the sender- and the
> receiver-server). But I do not control neither network-connectivity or
> Internet-connectivity at either sites.
>
> I did try turning of Window Scaling at both ends, but it did not help at
> all.
Hello Sahil, and thanks for your reply.
As I said in the first email, I control both ends (both the sender- and
the receiver-server). But I do not control neither network-connectivity
or Internet-connectivity at either sites.
I did try turning of Window Scaling at both ends, but it did not h
On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 07:53:01AM -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
> Steve Head:
> > This all works well for most of the lists we have, however on the
> > largish list (without fail in my testing today) I get for the first
> > three deliveries (which all happen to be local): 550 Mailbox unknown,
> > 25
On Wed, 22 Apr 2009, Jørn Odberg wrote:
> Would I need to do this at the sender or the receiver? Or both ends?
Do it on your end, which is what you control.
--
Sahil Tandon
Would I need to do this at the sender or the receiver? Or both ends?
Thanks for the reply, Wietse. And thanks for Postfix. :-)
Kind regards from Norway,
Jørn Odberg
Wietse Venema skrev:
Turn off TCP window scaling.
http://www.google.com/search?q=tcp+window+scaling
Wietse
--
_
Turn off TCP window scaling.
http://www.google.com/search?q=tcp+window+scaling
Wietse
Steve Head:
> This all works well for most of the lists we have, however on the
> largish list (without fail in my testing today) I get for the first
> three deliveries (which all happen to be local): 550 Mailbox unknown,
> 250 Successful delivery, followed by a 452 Over quota. and then postfix
> i
Ok, I've seen a couple of this on the mailinglist earlier. But as I
understand, each case is pretty much unique.
The case is: We're hosting a lot of linux-boxes around Norway, spread on
different locations, working as library servers. Everyone running
postfix. And we seldom have anything to d
G'day,
I've got a bit of a problem, I've rtfm'ed the bits I believe I need to
have read but I'm still stuck (or not understanding the bits I've
read...).
We've got postfix 2.5.5 running on Debian with majordomo installed and
working successfully. I've tested majordomo and it's working fine (in
41 matches
Mail list logo
