Hello,
I am currently having an issue where our enterprise mail system is
bugged(groupwise8sp1) and for some unknown reason, even for Novell, it is
adding ;1:1 to the end of the TO: line and this is causing e-mails to bounce
with a certain ISP who has very strict header checking.
I'm using
Hello all,
I am struggeling to get my Dovecot SASL to work within postfix. I have used
the configuration example listed on the main-site of dovecot and it
basically isn't giving me any success at all. I am probably missing
something easy, but after spending a few days testing and walking through
Quoting Rene Bakkum rene.bak...@gmail.com:
Hello all,
I am struggeling to get my Dovecot SASL to work within postfix. I have used
the configuration example listed on the main-site of dovecot and it
basically isn't giving me any success at all. I am probably missing
something easy, but after
On 11/11/2009 11:36 PM, Alex wrote:
Hi,
But commas do make it prettier to look at.
My reality has been shaken, and everything I previously thought I knew drawn
into question.
Yeah, crazy. I always had the smtpd_recipient_restrictions separated
by a comma, all on one line, until recently
On 11/12/2009 3:50 AM, Arjan Melein wrote:
Hello,
I am currently having an issue where our enterprise mail system is bugged(groupwise8sp1)
and for some unknown reason, even for Novell, it is adding ;1:1 to the end of
the TO: line and this is causing e-mails to bounce with a certain ISP who
Is there a portable way to share postmapped file across machines?
I have one postfix server running OpenBSD and another running CentOS,
I want the CentOS server to provide secondary services for for the BSD
box. The OpenBSD box uses virtual delivery:
/etc/postfix/main.cf:(BSD box)
...
#
* Gaby Vanhegan g...@vanhegan.net:
Is there a portable way to share postmapped file across machines?
Yes:
1) share the text files, then use a Makefile to convert them on the
target systems
2) Use compatible BerkeleyDB versions
3) Don't use BerkeleyDB, use CDB
--
Ralf Hildebrandt
On 12 Nov 2009, at 14:17, lst_ho...@kwsoft.de wrote:
I get the same error if I try to read the contents of the .db file
using postmap directly. Is there going to be some architectural
difference between the two systems? Is there a more cross-platform
file format I could use for the
On 12 Nov 2009, at 14:14, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
* Gaby Vanhegan g...@vanhegan.net:
Is there a portable way to share postmapped file across machines?
Yes:
1) share the text files, then use a Makefile to convert them on the
target systems
I already do this, I wanted to take this step
* Gaby Vanhegan g...@vanhegan.net:
I was under the impression that there was a performance penalty using
CDB with Postfix?
A negative penalty, yes
--
Ralf Hildebrandt
Geschäftsbereich IT | Abteilung Netzwerk
Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin
Campus Benjamin Franklin
Hindenburgdamm
* Gaby Vanhegan g...@vanhegan.net:
I guess I was just misleading myself with respect to CDB and
performance:
http://www.postfix.org/CDB_README.html
I've been using it for years, no problems...
--
Ralf Hildebrandt
Geschäftsbereich IT | Abteilung Netzwerk
Charité -
Hi Sir,
If i am selecting this option
smtp_destination_rate_delay = 1s
Will this reduce delivery to all domains or just one specific domain. Will
the actual throughput to the final delivery be reduced to one email per
second from my binded IP?.. Please confirm as that is what i am looking for.
On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 11:30:51AM +0100, St?phane MERLE wrote:
But then, what status get and email retried without success until the end ?
2009-11-12T10:59:32-0500 amnesiac postfix/qmgr[1706]: A323688C523:
from=jlu...@example.com, size=385848, nrcpt=50 (queue active)
Dhiraj Chatpar:
Hi Sir,
If i am selecting this option
smtp_destination_rate_delay = 1s
Will this reduce delivery to all domains or just one specific domain. Will
the actual throughput to the final delivery be reduced to one email per
second from my binded IP?.. Please confirm as that is
Hi,
Victor Duchovni a écrit :
On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 11:30:51AM +0100, St?phane MERLE wrote:
But then, what status get and email retried without success until the end ?
2009-11-12T10:59:32-0500 amnesiac postfix/qmgr[1706]: A323688C523:
from=jlu...@example.com, size=385848,
The emergency workaround is to remove the offending header.
If you try to rewrite it, you're likely to break it in new and
interesting ways.
-- Noel Jones
On 11/12/2009 7:51 AM, Arjan Melein wrote:
Is there no way to somehow rewrite it instead of removing it fully ?
I know its better to
Victor Duchovni a écrit :
On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 05:58:01PM +0100, St?phane MERLE wrote:
Victor Duchovni a ?crit :
On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 11:30:51AM +0100, St?phane MERLE wrote:
But then, what status get and email retried without success until the end
?
On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 07:32:50PM +0100, St?phane MERLE wrote:
Note, this is logged by qmgr(8) not the smtp(8) delivery agent, perhaps
you are looking in the wrong log entries. If the message is (still) in
the deferred queue, it has not expired yet.
Thank you so much, I was analysing the
On 2009-11-12 Gaby Vanhegan wrote:
Is there a portable way to share postmapped file across machines?
I have one postfix server running OpenBSD and another running CentOS, I
want the CentOS server to provide secondary services for for the BSD box.
The OpenBSD box uses virtual delivery:
Hi folks,
I'm still working on the problem you have all been so kind in helping
me with, and have a problem relating to helo_checks. We require a
proper FQDN for the helo, but would like to make an exception for
several IP addresses.
I've added check_helo_access as the first line of my
Hi,
To follow up with my own post, I should mention that I did postmap the
file, which I should have mentioned.
I also thought it might be better to add it to smtpd_client_restrictions?
smtpd_client_restrictions =
check_helo_access hash:/etc/postfix/helo_checks
Perhaps that's the way
Hi all,
Is it possible to set up special transport rules for the cleanup or pickup
daemons? Does that question even make sense?
What I have is something like this:
transport_maps = proxy:mysql:/etc/postfix/mysql_local.cf, hash:/etc/postfix/
relay.cf
mysql_local.cf picks out traffic destined
* Luis Daniel Lucio Quiroz luis.daniel.lu...@gmail.com:
Hi all,
I wonder if anyone has a link of could explain in detail differences on may
chackin between all *_check options. Mainly header_check, header_mime_check
body_check. I'm getting confussing
header_Checks = check the headers
On 11/12/2009 1:59 PM, Mark Washenberger wrote:
Hi all,
Is it possible to set up special transport rules for the cleanup or
pickup daemons? Does that question even make sense?
What I have is something like this:
transport_maps = proxy:mysql:/etc/postfix/mysql_local.cf
http://mysql_local.cf,
On 11/12/2009 1:48 PM, Alex wrote:
Hi folks,
I'm still working on the problem you have all been so kind in helping
me with, and have a problem relating to helo_checks. We require a
proper FQDN for the helo, but would like to make an exception for
several IP addresses.
I've added
On 11/12/2009 12:28 PM, Arjan Melein wrote:
Yea I just found that out when I just tried to sed the queue file :-)
Any way to limit it to only take out the line on domain X Y and Z ?
On a sidenote, its actually the RCPT TO: line and not the normal TO:
line ... not sure if that's going to be a
Noel Jones:
On 11/12/2009 12:28 PM, Arjan Melein wrote:
Yea I just found that out when I just tried to sed the queue file :-)
Any way to limit it to only take out the line on domain X Y and Z ?
On a sidenote, its actually the RCPT TO: line and not the normal TO:
line ... not sure if
On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 04:04:59PM -0500, Mark Washenberger wrote:
The low-brow workaround did the trick. I'm sure the other would have worked
as well, but I'm looking forward to not setting up more instances :-)
The complexity of multiple instances (with Postfix 2.6 and later) is
largely
On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 09:22:08PM +0100, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
Nested headers = headers of a nested message/rfc822 part
Like for example header in bounces
Yes, unless the bounce includes the headers only, and not the full
message in which case, the MIME part in question is just text:
On 12-Nov-2009, at 13:35, Wietse Venema wrote:
This an incredibly unsafe tool.
Ooo, those are my favorite kinds!
--
The very existence of flame-throwers proves that some time, somewhere,
someone said to themselves, You know, I want to set those people
over there on fire, but
Noel Jones wrote:
On 11/12/2009 1:48 PM, Alex wrote:
Hi folks,
I'm still working on the problem you have all been so kind in helping
me with, and have a problem relating to helo_checks. We require a
proper FQDN for the helo, but would like to make an exception for
several IP addresses.
I've
Hi,
Stop top posting. Google for the term if you don't understand.
Sorry, that was only to follow up with my own post, so people had a reference.
It looks as if you're trying to whitelist the client by IP, so you need
check_client_access to check an IP.
Yes, and I've tried that too. I have
On 11/12/2009 9:21 PM, Alex wrote:
It looks as if you're trying to whitelist the client by IP, so you need
check_client_access to check an IP.
Yes, and I've tried that too. I have done quite a bit of reading, and
afraid I'm getting conflicting info now. I've read posts from Ralf in
the past,
Hi,
If you don't want to whitelist the IP address completely but instead just
want to allow it to bypass your HELO checks, then check_helo_access will
work. However, you should first understand that the type of lookup performed
depends on the name of the restriction, NOT where the restriction
Hello Noel,
As I checked with http://www.postfix.org/announcements.html; I
found the following current stable version of postfix mail server.
But I do not find any RPM for the same.
# August 28, 2009: Stable release Postfix 2.6.5.
Currently I am using postfix version as resulted
On 12-Nov-2009, at 21:09, Alex wrote:
But helo is a component of the envelope, no?
No.
--
[TN]FBMachine i got kicked out of Barnes and Noble once for
moving all the bibles into the fiction section
36 matches
Mail list logo
