Hello,
One more info, maybe we can solve the source of the problem
When I use related syntax
sql_hostnames: (212.58.4.247:3306,212.58.4.245:3306)
I got related error and next server are queried. interesting, looks like sasl
or postfix I don't know which one but they care about :
Nov 23
Vahriç,
* Vahriç Muhtaryan vah...@doruk.net.tr:
One more info, maybe we can solve the source of the problem
When I use related syntax
sql_hostnames: (212.58.4.247:3306,212.58.4.245:3306)
I got related error and next server are queried. interesting, looks like sasl
or postfix I don't
Thanks so far,
the funny thing about the sending Mailserver is, that the MX for the domain
in question is:
forward : mail.bbb.com - ddd.dd.ddd.70
reverse : ddd.dd.ddd.70 - mail.bbb.com
BUT
the mail is delivered via ddd.dd.ddd.66
Might it be a problem of wrong NATing on their side?
Thanks
On 11/30/2009, techlist06 (techlis...@msws.org) wrote:
So, if they click on reply in their client, the reply message should be
sent to maillist_nore...@mydomain.com. My end accepts it (through spam
filters), but then rejects the address with my custom reject message via my
new access table
Hi folks,
I'm using postfix for just receiving emails from network, do I need to enable
TLS or anything else for building up a secure channel.
I guess all this is required in case of my email clients connecting to my email
server.
Thanks Regards,
Sumit Arora
IPG RD Hub, Gurgaon
Quoting Arora, Sumit sumit.ar...@hp.com:
Hi folks,
I'm using postfix for just receiving emails from network, do I need
to enable TLS or anything else for building up a secure channel.
I guess all this is required in case of my email clients connecting
to my email server.
Yes, enable
Sorry to bring this here, but we are having trouble setting up a
Postfix/dovecot mail system.
Background:
We are a bunch of retirees, so cost is a factor in any decision. We all
have IT experience, some of going back decades, however the world of
Linux and its software is new to us all. We used
You are NOT 'rejecting', you are ACCEPTING, then BOUNCING, which you
should never do if you can possibly help it. Reject it at smtp time.
Why waste system resources scanning messages you will later bounce?
I understand your point. Thank you for correcting my syntax. FWIW, this
will only
Sorry to bring this here, but we are having trouble setting up a
Postfix/dovecot mail system.
Background:
We are a bunch of retirees, so cost is a factor in any decision. We all
have IT experience, some of going back decades, however the world of
Linux and its software is new to us all. We used
Centos 5.4 - while it looks like a good choice, there has been some
political infighting going on recently which makes us a little nervous
about its future. In addition we have found that a number of the core
packages we wish to use are out of date (postfix, dovecot, amavisd-new
among them).
Eero Volotinen wrote:
Centos 5.4 - while it looks like a good choice, there has been some
political infighting going on recently which makes us a little nervous
about its future. In addition we have found that a number of the core
packages we wish to use are out of date (postfix, dovecot,
On 12/1/2009 9:09 AM, John wrote:
Fedora - a little too dynamic for use as a server. This is to be
expected as it is a development system which I don't think is aimed at a
production like environment, plus the latest release seems very desktop
oriented.
FC supposedly changes too much. I might
On Tue, 01 Dec 2009 16:30:36 +0200
Eero Volotinen eero.voloti...@iki.fi wrote:
Centos 5.4 - while it looks like a good choice, there has been some
political infighting going on recently which makes us a little
nervous about its future. In addition we have found that a number
of the core
On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 9:39 AM, John Peach post...@johnpeach.com wrote:
On Tue, 01 Dec 2009 16:30:36 +0200
Eero Volotinen eero.voloti...@iki.fi wrote:
Centos 5.4 - while it looks like a good choice, there has been some
political infighting going on recently which makes us a little
nervous
Centos 5.4 - while it looks like a good choice, there has been some
political infighting going on recently which makes us a little nervous
about its future. In addition we have found that a number of the core
packages we wish to use are out of date (postfix, dovecot, amavisd-new
among them).
I am getting a report from someone on my network that they are getting
delivery failures when attempting to send an email from my Postfix
server to the remote mail server. I see the message stuck on my
Postfix servers queue:
CB87E778055 1337 Mon Nov 30 08:59:15 tprem...@iamghost.com
On 12/1/2009 9:09 AM, John wrote:
Sorry to bring this here, but we are having trouble setting up a
Postfix/dovecot mail system.
Background:
We are a bunch of retirees, so cost is a factor in any decision. We all
have IT experience, some of going back decades, however the world of
Linux and
Carlos Williams wrote:
CB87E778055 1337 Mon Nov 30 08:59:15 tprem...@iamghost.com
(connect to a.mx.premore.net[198.186.193.20]: No route to host)
However my mail server wont send to this destination address and I
have no idea why. Can someone tell me how I can better
On Tue, Dec 01, 2009 at 10:03:21AM -0500, Carlos Williams wrote:
CB87E778055 1337 Mon Nov 30 08:59:15 tprem...@iamghost.com
(connect to a.mx.premore.net[198.186.193.20]: No route to host)
b...@premore.net
Looks like more of a
On Tue, 2009-12-01 at 10:03 -0500, Carlos Williams wrote:
I am getting a report from someone on my network that they are getting
delivery failures when attempting to send an email from my Postfix
server to the remote mail server. I see the message stuck on my
Postfix servers queue:
* Carlos Williams carlosw...@gmail.com:
I am getting a report from someone on my network that they are getting
delivery failures when attempting to send an email from my Postfix
server to the remote mail server. I see the message stuck on my
Postfix servers queue:
CB87E778055 1337 Mon
On Tue, 1 Dec 2009 10:03:21 -0500, you wrote:
I am getting a report from someone on my network that they are getting
delivery failures when attempting to send an email from my Postfix
server to the remote mail server. I see the message stuck on my
Postfix servers queue:
CB87E778055 1337 Mon
* Evan Platt e...@espphotography.com:
Unless I'm misreading and misunderstanding your logs
# telnet 198.186.193.20 25
Trying 198.186.193.20...
telnet: connect to address 198.186.193.20: Operation timed out
telnet: Unable to connect to remote host
The mail server on that IP isn't
On Tue, 1 Dec 2009 16:13:02 +0100, you wrote:
# telnet 198.186.193.20 25
Trying 198.186.193.20...
Connected to 198.186.193.20.
Escape character is '^]'.
220 share.docforge.org ESMTP Postfix
D'oh... Forgot which machine I was connected to.I tried it on the one
that has port 25 blocked by the ISP.
John wrote:
Sorry to bring this here, but we are having trouble setting up a
Postfix/dovecot mail system.
Background:
We are a bunch of retirees, so cost is a factor in any decision. We all
have IT experience, some of going back decades, however the world of
Linux and its software is new
On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 10:10 AM, Ralf Hildebrandt
ralf.hildebra...@charite.de wrote:
Works OK. What does tracroute 198.186.193.20 return?
# traceroute 198.186.193.20
traceroute to 198.186.193.20 (198.186.193.20), 30 hops max, 60 byte packets
... snip ...
4 zr-pot1-te0-0-0-3.x-win.dfn.de
On 12/1/2009 10:08 AM, Brian Evans - Postfix List wrote:
soapbox
I personally use Gentoo for all my Linux needs.
I wasn't going to say anything, but I'll add a 'me too' here.
I've been using Gentoo only for our in house servers since 2005. They've
all been through 2 major GCC version updates,
* Carlos Williams carlosw...@gmail.com:
25 dns5.docforge.org (198.186.193.20) 4.241 ms 1.685 ms 0.271 ms
I am unable to connect via Telnet so it appears to be a network / ISP issue.
car...@tunafish:~$ telnet 198.186.193.20 25
Trying 198.186.193.20...
telnet: Unable to connect to
Charles Marcus wrote:
On 12/1/2009 10:08 AM, Brian Evans - Postfix List wrote:
soapbox
I personally use Gentoo for all my Linux needs.
I wasn't going to say anything, but I'll add a 'me too' here.
Are you really using lot of servers (like 100 pieces) with gentoo on
production environment?
Terry L. Inzauro wrote:
John wrote:
Sorry to bring this here, but we are having trouble setting up a
Postfix/dovecot mail system.
Background:
We are a bunch of retirees, so cost is a factor in any decision. We all
have IT experience, some of going back decades, however the world of
On 12/1/2009, Eero Volotinen (eero.voloti...@iki.fi) wrote:
Are you really using lot of servers (like 100 pieces) with gentoo on
production environment?
No, only 3 - what made you think 'our in-house servers' meant hundreds?
I do know a few people who manage them in the hundreds with some
On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 10:43 AM, Ralf Hildebrandt
ralf.hildebra...@charite.de wrote:
What is the output of traceroute 198.186.193.20 ?
I get no results from my mail server:
traceroute to 198.186.193.20 (198.186.193.20), 30 hops max, 40 byte packets
1 * * *
2 * * *
3 * * *
4 * * *
5 *
On Tue, Dec 01, 2009 at 10:51:31AM -0500, John wrote:
Terry L. Inzauro wrote:
When it comes down to it, the best distro is the one you know
how to use. I would start with a distro that you are most
comfortable with and know how to use the best.
+1 ... I started on Slackware and have not
On 01/12/2009 14:09, John wrote:
Sorry to bring this here, but we are having trouble setting up a
Postfix/dovecot mail system.
Background:
We are a bunch of retirees, so cost is a factor in any decision. We all
have IT experience, some of going back decades, however the world of
Linux and its
Perhaps your mail server is on a DNSBL?
Regards
Frog
- Original Message -
From: Carlos Williams carlosw...@gmail.com
To: postfix-users@postfix.org
Sent: Tuesday, 1 December, 2009 4:05:25 PM
Subject: Re: What Is Causing This Failure
On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 10:43 AM, Ralf Hildebrandt
On Tue, 2009-12-01 at 16:27 +, Frog wrote:
Perhaps your mail server is on a DNSBL?
Regards
Frog
Nope, this is a problem at the ip level, routing. This is not a postfix
or mail/smtp issue.
- Original Message -
From: Carlos Williams carlosw...@gmail.com
To:
Frog wrote:
Perhaps your mail server is on a DNSBL?
Regards
Frog
- Original Message -
From: Carlos Williams carlosw...@gmail.com
To: postfix-users@postfix.org
Sent: Tuesday, 1 December, 2009 4:05:25 PM
Subject: Re: What Is Causing This Failure
On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 10:43
On Tue, Dec 01, 2009 at 12:37:47PM +, Arora, Sumit wrote:
I'm using postfix for just receiving emails from network, do I need
to enable TLS or anything else for building up a secure channel.
I guess all this is required in case of my email clients connecting
to my email server.
Your
On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 11:42 AM, Terry L. Inzauro
tinza...@ha-solutions.net wrote:
why all the off topic posts today?
I suspected this to be Postfix or Mail related so I posted here. It
was determined with the help of the list it was not a MTA issue.
Simple as that!
Sorry for any
Ali Majdzadeh put forth on 12/1/2009 12:25 AM:
Dear friends,
Thanks for this nice discussion. Actually, as a project, we are going to
deliver an e-mail architecture which supports over 100 users. We use
Postfix, courier-imap, amavisd-new, spamassassin and clamav and of
course the tools
Stan,
Thank you a lot for all these valuable information. Your reply proved that
there exists some circumstances where nothing can help but experience.
Thanks again.
Regarding the points which had mentioned in your mail, I would like to ask a
question concerning what Wietse proposed. Does the
John Peach wrote:
On Tue, 01 Dec 2009 16:30:36 +0200
Eero Volotinen eero.voloti...@iki.fi wrote:
Centos 5.4 - while it looks like a good choice, there has been some
political infighting going on recently which makes us a little
nervous about its future. In addition we have found that a
Carlos Williams put forth on 12/1/2009 9:32 AM:
I am unable to connect via Telnet so it appears to be a network / ISP issue.
car...@tunafish:~$ telnet 198.186.193.20 25
Trying 198.186.193.20...
telnet: Unable to connect to remote host: No route to host
Definitely a network problem between
Ali Majdzadeh:
question concerning what Wietse proposed. Does the usage of milter help? I
mean, is the milter architecture considered as a way to kill spam load
_before_ piping inbound connections to AS/AV content filter daemons? Or,
Milter is a way to inspect or update message content without
On Tue, 01 Dec 2009 09:39:06 -0500 John Peach post...@johnpeach.com wrote:
On Tue, 01 Dec 2009 16:30:36 +0200
Eero Volotinen eero.voloti...@iki.fi wrote:
Centos 5.4 - while it looks like a good choice, there has been some
political infighting going on recently which makes us a little
Wietse,
Hi
Thanks for your reply. I recall that I had read about another filtering
option available in Postfix which was called smtpd_proxy_filter (if I spell
it correctly) and which filtered messages before queuing. So, is there any
difference between the so-called method and using Milter?
Thanks
Ali Majdzadeh:
Wietse,
Hi
Thanks for your reply. I recall that I had read about another filtering
option available in Postfix which was called smtpd_proxy_filter (if I spell
it correctly) and which filtered messages before queuing. So, is there any
difference between the so-called method and
Wietse,
Thanks for all these useful points. I will inform the list about the results
of our tests regarding the issue.
Warm Regards
Ali Majdzadeh Kohbanani
2009/12/1 Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org
Ali Majdzadeh:
Wietse,
Hi
Thanks for your reply. I recall that I had read about another
Scott Kitterman put forth on 12/1/2009 12:22 PM:
I am in favor of Ubuntu Server for Postfix related uses. Postfix is the
standard MTA, so it's use is well documented, pretty much everything you
might want to add on to Postfix is packaged so there's no need to hunt down
external
Stan Hoeppner wrote:
Half your argument is based on Debian features.
Which are also, therefore, ubuntu features.
Why not just use Debian
then, instead of Ubuntu?
Because enterprise support is available for ubuntu, and also, if someone
is familiar with ubuntu desktop already it makes sense
On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 4:15 PM, Joe j...@tmsusa.com wrote:
Stan Hoeppner wrote:
I've been a
Debian (non-GUI) user for almost 10 years. I've never touched Ubuntu,
or any other distro. Debian has always come through for my server
needs, so I've never considered anything else. Convince me why
Brian Mathis wrote:
On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 4:15 PM, Joe j...@tmsusa.com wrote:
Stan Hoeppner wrote:
I've been a
Debian (non-GUI) user for almost 10 years. I've never touched Ubuntu,
or any other distro. Debian has always come through for my server
needs, so I've never considered anything
Stan Hoeppner:
Wietse Venema put forth on 12/1/2009 1:20 PM:
If your performance is inadequate, I suggest that you do a detailed
system performance analysis to find out if the limit is CPU, memory,
file I/O or perhaps some trivial DNS configuration problem.
That may be difficult for
Udo Rader wrote:
Brian Mathis wrote:
On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 4:15 PM, Joe j...@tmsusa.com wrote:
Stan Hoeppner wrote:
I've been a
Debian (non-GUI) user for almost 10 years. I've never touched Ubuntu,
or any other distro. Debian has always come through for my server
needs, so I've never
Wietse Venema put forth on 12/1/2009 3:47 PM:
Surely, mail is injected via SMTP, and therefore, the Postfix SMTP
server will attempt to lookup the client hostname and IP address;
since they are using SMTP-based content filters, that is another
source of name service lookups. All this
Stan Hoeppner:
Wietse Venema put forth on 12/1/2009 3:47 PM:
Surely, mail is injected via SMTP, and therefore, the Postfix SMTP
server will attempt to lookup the client hostname and IP address;
since they are using SMTP-based content filters, that is another
source of name service
Wietse Venema put forth on 12/1/2009 6:17 PM:
I would not be so quick to dismiss DNS-related problems out of hand
in scenarios that involve synthetic email messages.
Ok, I follow you now Wietse. Given the inbound mail load he's
generating, the DNS resolvers in his test environment may not be
On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 2:20 PM, John j...@klam.ca wrote:
Thank you all for your input, having looked at the responses and
discussed amongst ourselves and as I am the grunt doing the work, we
will probably go with Centos.
Some of our reasoning was, it close to Fedora so we have some
freebsd 7.2
mail_version = 2.7-20091008
out of 6 postscreen machines, I've got one that every 20 or 30 minutes just
halts, port 25 is dead (several monit agents see it dead), then it starts off
by itself after a few minutes, dumping a bunch of these in maillog:
warning: postscreen_dnsbl_query:
On Tuesday 01 December 2009, Terry L. Inzauro wrote:
snip
Personally, Debian Stable (currently Lenny) is my Linux of choice for
production system. Package management via apt is second to none and
everything is very well documented with a willing and able community for
support.
Why restate
David Koski put forth on 12/1/2009 10:45 PM:
For example, doing a distribution upgrade
has rendered a system unbootable and made me boot from CD to fix it. I have
never had a problem upgrading Debian. I have even upgraded several remotely
without a problem. Try upgrading RH 3 to 4 to 5
On Tuesday 01 December 2009, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
BTW, don't you really mean?
# apt-get purge exim
# apt-get install postfix
Last I tried I couldn't remove the MTA without replacement. The
onliner apt-get --purge install postfix installs postfix and purges exim
without complaining about
Quoting David Koski da...@kosmosisland.com:
On Tuesday 01 December 2009, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
BTW, don't you really mean?
# apt-get purge exim
# apt-get install postfix
Last I tried I couldn't remove the MTA without replacement. The
onliner apt-get --purge install postfix installs postfix
David Koski wrote:
On Tuesday 01 December 2009, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
BTW, don't you really mean?
# apt-get purge exim
# apt-get install postfix
Last I tried I couldn't remove the MTA without replacement. The
onliner apt-get --purge install postfix installs postfix and purges exim
Quoting Eero Volotinen eero.voloti...@iki.fi:
Quoting David Koski da...@kosmosisland.com:
On Tuesday 01 December 2009, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
BTW, don't you really mean?
# apt-get purge exim
# apt-get install postfix
Last I tried I couldn't remove the MTA without replacement. The
onliner
65 matches
Mail list logo
