On Thu, June 18, 2009 7:59 am, Aravind Divakaran said:
I am having a problem with duplicate bcc's for recipient_bcc_maps and
sender_bcc_maps.I have a content filter set up for disclaimer(-o
content_filter =dfilt: in master.cf).When mail arrives, the bcc is
generated and sent. Then when the
ram wrote:
On Thu, 2009-06-18 at 12:21 +0530, J. Bakshi wrote:
Dear list,
Here is a very urgent problem with **relay** in my postfix.
My postfix is allowed to relay a particular domain. I have put the
configuration as
relay_domains = domian_name
On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 06:57:39AM +0100, Steve wrote:
I've just realised that I don't understand something clearly. I have
this top header in a mail;
Received: from instantinfo.com (unknown [74.10.219.114])
Received: from ipnet5-host235.subictel.com (unknown [210.14.36.235])
and even
SNIP
Note When I send mail from this very server the mails are forwarded
according to the virtual_alias_maps.
but when I do the same from another server the second server mail.info
shows that the message is sent successfully. But the first server
where my postfix is running with vitual_alias
With Postfix, the format is:
Received: from HELO (FCRDNS [IPADDR]) ...
According to RFC 5321 section 4.4:
This line MUST be structured as follows:
o The FROM clause, which MUST be supplied in an SMTP environment,
SHOULD contain both (1) the name of the source host as presented
On Thu, 2009-06-18 at 07:19 -0400, Victor Duchovni wrote:
On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 06:57:39AM +0100, Steve wrote:
I've just realised that I don't understand something clearly. I have
this top header in a mail;
Received: from instantinfo.com (unknown [74.10.219.114])
Received: from
ram wrote:
SNIP
Note When I send mail from this very server the mails are forwarded
according to the virtual_alias_maps.
but when I do the same from another server the second server mail.info
shows that the message is sent successfully. But the first server
where my postfix is running
Dear,
we use blacklists as a first defense against spammers. We have hese
lists at our postfix server:
reject_rbl_client pbl.spamhaus.org,
reject_rbl_client list.dsbl.org,
reject_rbl_client bl.spamcop.net,
reject_rbl_client safe.dnsbl.sorbs.net,
reject_rbl_client cbl.abuseat.org,
* polloxx poll...@gmail.com:
Dear,
we use blacklists as a first defense against spammers. We have hese
lists at our postfix server:
reject_rbl_client pbl.spamhaus.org,
reject_rbl_client list.dsbl.org,
reject_rbl_client bl.spamcop.net,
reject_rbl_client safe.dnsbl.sorbs.net,
Quoting Ralf Hildebrandt ralf.hildebra...@charite.de:
* polloxx poll...@gmail.com:
Dear,
we use blacklists as a first defense against spammers. We have hese
lists at our postfix server:
reject_rbl_client pbl.spamhaus.org,
reject_rbl_client list.dsbl.org,
reject_rbl_client
* Ralf Hildebrandt ralf.hildebra...@charite.de:
Of course.
Read: http://dsbl.org/
Remove list.dsbl.org
Replace pbl.spamhaus.org with zen.spamhaus.org
Remove cbl.abuseat.org, which is included in cbl.abuseat.org
Remove cbl.abuseat.org, which is included zen.spamhaus.org :) (sorry)
--
On Tors, Juni 18, 2009 15:04, polloxx wrote:
reject_rbl_client pbl.spamhaus.org,
change to zen.spamhaus.org
reject_rbl_client list.dsbl.org,
still aktive ?
reject_rbl_client bl.spamcop.net,
good
reject_rbl_client safe.dnsbl.sorbs.net,
properly ok, but i dont use it here
On Thu, 2009-06-18 at 08:28 -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
With Postfix, the format is:
Received: from HELO (FCRDNS [IPADDR]) ...
According to RFC 5321 section 4.4:
This line MUST be structured as follows:
o The FROM clause, which MUST be supplied in an SMTP environment,
On Thu, 2009-06-18 at 15:04 +0200, polloxx wrote:
Dear,
we use blacklists as a first defense against spammers. We have hese
lists at our postfix server:
reject_rbl_client pbl.spamhaus.org,
reject_rbl_client list.dsbl.org,
reject_rbl_client bl.spamcop.net,
reject_rbl_client
Noel,
Your instructions worked perfectly. Now only clients that AUTH can relay AND
send mail to systems users.
The system user thing was really bothering me. What would stop a spammer from
connected to my server and spamming the hell out of my system users (domain
that Postfix receieves
Quoting EASY steve.h...@digitalcertainty.co.uk
steve.h...@digitalcertainty.co.uk:
On Thu, 2009-06-18 at 15:04 +0200, polloxx wrote:
Dear,
we use blacklists as a first defense against spammers. We have hese
lists at our postfix server:
reject_rbl_client pbl.spamhaus.org,
Rodman Frowert wrote:
Noel,
Your instructions worked perfectly. Now only clients that AUTH can
relay AND send mail to systems users.
The system user thing was really bothering me. What would stop a
spammer from connected to my server and spamming the hell out of my
system users (domain
Rodman Frowert wrote:
Anyway, would you mind just looking over the end of my main.cf file
and seeing if you see anything out of the ordinary or anything I
could improve on? I've been using Postfix for about 3 years, but like
most people, once it is running for a while I forget how to
Steve wrote:
Hi List,
What is the quickest, easiest (and scriptable) way to have Postfix defer
everything with a 4xx error. It's an extension to my 'after midnight'
tests. Not allowing any connections is fine, but I would prefer to
reject with a custom 4xx message such as GO AWAY - IT'S AFTER
Yeah, that makes more sense, doesn't it??
:-)
Thanks!
Rodman
- Original Message -
From: Brian Evans - Postfix List grkni...@scent-team.com
To: postfix-users@postfix.org
Sent: Thursday, June 18, 2009 9:45 AM
Subject: Re: SASL Problem
Rodman Frowert wrote:
Anyway, would you mind
Those darn spammers!
Thanks for your help, Noel.
Rodman
- Original Message -
From: Noel Jones njo...@megan.vbhcs.org
To: Rodman Frowert rod...@thefrowerts.com; postfix-users@postfix.org
Sent: Thursday, June 18, 2009 9:41 AM
Subject: Re: SASL Problem
Rodman Frowert wrote:
Noel,
On Thu, 2009-06-18 at 10:07 -0500, Noel Jones wrote:
Steve wrote:
Hi List,
What is the quickest, easiest (and scriptable) way to have Postfix
defer
everything with a 4xx error. It's an extension to my 'after
midnight'
tests. Not allowing any connections is fine, but I would prefer to
On Thu, 2009-06-18 at 12:42 -0400, Terry Carmen wrote:
# /etc/postfix/deferall.regexp
/^/ DEFER Please try again during business hours
You might want to do a little log exploration and see if 100% of everything
you receive after hours is spam
Not all mail received after hours is
On Thu, 2009-06-18 at 11:23 -0500, Larry Stone wrote:
On Thu, 18 Jun 2009, Steve wrote:
I'm not so sure it's nonsense. Look at it this way if the office is
closed there is nobody there to deal with email. So it's pointless to
accept it.
How about so that it is there when the office
Steve,
I know it's already been mentioned, but greylist. That has cut down our spam
90%+. Restricting your email to hours when you office is open means that legit
email gets backed on the senders servers queues. If you really don't think
your need the email during that period of time, do
On Thu, 2009-06-18 at 13:23 -0400, Terry Carmen wrote:
Even if I was a local customer, the concept of email only works when the
lights are on would make me look somewhere else.
That is your prerogative and I respect that. It depends on what your
core business is and how desperate you are I
Steve,
That's not what the users will receive though. They will, probably after 4
hours receive a nicely formatted message from their local MTA that says
something like
Message to j...@domain.tld has been delayed. We will retry this message
again in X hours...
And remeber, anthing
Noel Jones wrote:
Steve wrote:
Hi List,
What is the quickest, easiest (and scriptable) way to have Postfix defer
everything with a 4xx error. It's an extension to my 'after midnight'
tests. Not allowing any connections is fine, but I would prefer to
reject with a custom 4xx message such as GO
On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 01:13:21PM -0500, Noel Jones wrote:
# /etc/postfix/deferall.regexp
/^/ DEFER Please try again during business hours
The sender may get a better error message if you change the above to
/^/ DEFER 4.3.2 Please try again during business hours
The 4.3.2 suggests your
On Tors, Juni 18, 2009 07:48, Steve wrote:
It's an odd request to be able to 'offline' with a defer so I won't be
surprised if I can't do it, but I would be Cindy Ecstacy Ecstatic if I
could.
google postfwd, one of the problems you like to solve comes handy there :)
--
xpoint
On 6/18/2009, Steve (steve.h...@digitalcertainty.co.uk) wrote:
That said, the IP tables idea is much better.
Not from what you've said. Why not just shut the entire server OFF...
power it down.
But, I agree with everyone else... this is just plain silliness, a waste
of time, energy, and will,
On Thu, 2009-06-18 at 14:42 -0400, Victor Duchovni wrote:
On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 01:13:21PM -0500, Noel Jones wrote:
# /etc/postfix/deferall.regexp
/^/ DEFER Please try again during business hours
The sender may get a better error message if you change the above to
/^/ DEFER 4.3.2
On Thu, 18 Jun 2009 14:42:36 -0400, Victor Duchovni
victor.ducho...@morganstanley.com wrote:
On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 01:13:21PM -0500, Noel Jones wrote:
# /etc/postfix/deferall.regexp
/^/ DEFER Please try again during business hours
The sender may get a better error message if you change
On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 08:28:12AM -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
With Postfix, the format is:
Received: from HELO (FCRDNS [IPADDR]) ...
According to RFC 5321 section 4.4:
Which matches the second form in each case of Extended-Domain and
TCP-Info. Odd that they appear to be standardizing
On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 03:07:59PM +0100, Steve wrote:
On Thu, 2009-06-18 at 08:28 -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
With Postfix, the format is:
Received: from HELO (FCRDNS [IPADDR]) ...
According to RFC 5321 section 4.4:
This line MUST be structured as follows:
o The
On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 08:16:51PM +0100, EASY
steve.h...@digitalcertainty.co.uk wrote:
But it still does *not* mean there is anyone in the office to answer any
legitimate mail - come back later when we are open. It's simple enough.
That has nothing to do with MTAs. MTAs accept and deliver
I think Barracude actually has a Postfix server on their appliance
MailTraq and Barracuda SMTPD dialog phrases are verbatim stock postfix phrases,
as far as I've seen.
Len
Victor Duchovni:
If they send a fax will it get answered? No.
Postfix does not answer mail, it delivers it. The fax will get
delivered, unless you also turn off your fax machines at night.
I think that the original question has long been answered (turning
on/off inbound email delivery) and
On Thu, 2009-06-18 at 21:21 +0200, Len Conrad wrote:
I think Barracude actually has a Postfix server on their appliance
MailTraq and Barracuda SMTPD dialog phrases are verbatim stock postfix
phrases, as far as I've seen.
Len
LOL - they do, on port 2525. It's the part of the
From: Terry Carmen te...@cnysupport.com
To: postfix users list postfix-users@postfix.org
Sent: Thursday, June 18, 2009 5:23:42 PM
Subject: Re: Defer All INET
On Thu, 2009-06-18 at 12:42 -0400, Terry Carmen wrote:
# /etc/postfix/deferall.regexp
/^/
40 matches
Mail list logo
