Matias wrote:
Hi,
I want to move away from postgrey to a sql based greylist service, so
that I can access the greylist database from more than one server.
I've been reading about sqlgrey, gps, gld, etc...
Hi,
I've tried gld with success and satisfaction. I recommed it to you!
Angelo
On 2010-03-22 Bas Mevissen wrote:
Why catch-all? Because I often use the part before the @ as a key to
see the origin of the e-mail when subscribing.
That's what address extension was invented for. See the respective
section of man 8 local.
Regards
Ansgar Wiechers
--
Abstractions save us time
On Tue, 2010-03-23 at 10:24 +0100, Ansgar Wiechers wrote:
On 2010-03-22 Bas Mevissen wrote:
Why catch-all? Because I often use the part before the @ as a key to
see the origin of the e-mail when subscribing.
That's what address extension was invented for. See the respective
section of man
2010/3/19 mouss mo...@ml.netoyen.net:
Oleksii Krykun a écrit :
If I use smtpd_reject_unlisted_recipient=yes or
smtpd_recipient_restrictions=reject_unlisted_recipient options all
messages to non-existant addresses are rejected.
But if anybody sends message to multiple addresses in same domain
Is the MTU-buffer-size mismatch in the SMTP client or the milter?
An upgrade to clamav-milter is being carried out tonight during scheduled
downtime so I will investigate at this time and post to the list
accordingly.
Dave Green
On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 10:55:04AM +0100, Bas Mevissen wrote:
On Tue, 2010-03-23 at 10:24 +0100, Ansgar Wiechers wrote:
On 2010-03-22 Bas Mevissen wrote:
Why catch-all? Because I often use the part before the @
as a key to see the origin of the e-mail when subscribing.
That's what
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 02:36:21PM +0200, Dudi Goldenberg wrote:
250-mail.iamghost.com
250-PIPELINING
250-SIZE 1024
250-VRFY
250-ETRN
250-XXXA
250-AUTH PLAIN LOGIN
250-AUTH=PLAIN LOGIN
250-ENHANCEDSTATUSCODES
250-8BITMIME
250 DSN
My guess is that you have a PIX with smtp
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 9:14 PM, Robert Schetterer
rob...@schetterer.org wrote:
Am 23.03.2010 00:14, schrieb mouss:
Also I droped the use of the VDA patches, since it implements
everything in Postfix's LDA and I am actually using the Dovecot's
(deliver).
well, if you use dovecot, then forget
On Tue, 2010-03-23 at 05:43 -0500, /dev/rob0 wrote:
I'm aware of address extension.
I think maybe I have discussed this with you before as well.
I don't think so :-)
It is a well-known trick, so the
extension is likely to be stripped off by spam senders.
Funny thing about that. I
Hey group,
I am having some problems with virtual aliases that are fetched from a
LDAP server with STARTTLS. Unfortunately, the error logs in this case
don't seem to be very helpful, as all I can see is:
postfix/master[1043]: warning: process /usr/lib/postfix/smtpd pid 1790
killed by signal 6
Hi guys
At the moment we use SASL authentication to allow our users to
send mail through our mailer (Postfix 2.5). I would like to extend this
to using client certificates for authentication as well.
Our users have personal certificates that are signed by a the TERENA
Personal CA. Due to the
Hi all,
I need to send to an email address -...@domain.tld (with a minus at
the beginning of the localpart). I've checked the BNF from RFC 822 and
this syntax seems to be correct but postfix (v2.3.3) qmgr refuse it :
Mar 22 10:56:41 ns201715 postfix/pickup[13076]: 3FB0F29F0CE: uid=48
On 3/23/2010 9:02 AM, Alain NAKACHE wrote:
Hi all,
I need to send to an email address -...@domain.tld (with a minus at
the beginning of the localpart). I've checked the BNF from RFC 822 and
this syntax seems to be correct but postfix (v2.3.3) qmgr refuse it :
Noel Jones a écrit :
On 3/23/2010 9:02 AM, Alain NAKACHE wrote:
Hi all,
I need to send to an email address -...@domain.tld (with a minus at
the beginning of the localpart). I've checked the BNF from RFC 822 and
this syntax seems to be correct but postfix (v2.3.3) qmgr refuse it :
Dick Visser:
Hi guys
At the moment we use SASL authentication to allow our users to
send mail through our mailer (Postfix 2.5). I would like to extend this
to using client certificates for authentication as well.
Our users have personal certificates that are signed by a the TERENA
[An on-line version of this announcement will be available at
http://www.postfix.org/announcements/postfix-2.6.6.html]
Postfix legacy releases 2.6.6, 2.5.10 and 2.4.14 contain fixes that
were already included with Postfix 2.7 (stable release) and Postfix
2.8 (experimental release).
NOTE: Postfix
On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 10:10:44AM -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
* issuer TERENA Personal CA
* O=TERENA
* C=NL
I guess what I am looking for is a new restriction called something like
check_ccert_attr, that would use user defined attributes to take
decisions. That would be really
Our Q2 patch cycle is coming up and I was going to upgrade 2.6.5 - 2.6.6 on
the servers but then though maybe 2.6.5 - 2.7.0 might be in order. I have
everything ready to go either way (download and created RPM's for both 2.6.6
and 2.7.0).
Is there any consideration that needs to be made in
On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 01:16:03PM +, Daniel Gomes wrote:
postfix/master[1043]: warning: process /usr/lib/postfix/smtpd pid 1790
killed by signal 6
postfix/master[1043]: warning: /usr/lib/postfix/smtpd: bad command
startup -- throttling
Is smtpd running in a chroot jail?
Is OpenLDAP
On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 08:47:27AM -0700, Gary Smith wrote:
Our Q2 patch cycle is coming up and I was going to upgrade 2.6.5 - 2.6.6 on
the servers but then though maybe 2.6.5 - 2.7.0 might be in order. I have
everything ready to go either way (download and created RPM's for both 2.6.6
Everything you need to know is the RELEASE_NOTES.
Read them already... I just wanted to do a double check first.
Thanks,
Gary-
Postfix 2.7.0 is stable and thus considered production ready. The
2.7-release features some nice improvements over the 2.6-release,
described in the release notes:
http://postfix.rhinotech.nl/postfix-release/official/postfix-2.7.0.RELEASE_NOTES
There may be several legitimate reasons to stick
There may be several legitimate reasons to stick with an older version
for some time, but if it's all the same to you, then using the latest
stable release is always the best default choice.
For products like postfix (in terms of how they manager their product), I have
high confidence when
On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 09:09:24AM -0700, Gary Smith wrote:
Everything you need to know is the RELEASE_NOTES.
Read them already... I just wanted to do a double check first.
Good. You should be all set then. By all means go with 2.7.
--
Viktor.
P.S. Morgan Stanley is looking
On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 04:18:49PM +, rich...@buzzhost.co.uk wrote:
[ Received: from stytwo.spampig.org.uk (stytwo.spampig.org.uk [212.69.52.158]) ]
On Tue, 2010-03-23 at 12:05 -0400, Victor Duchovni wrote:
Everything you need to know is the RELEASE_NOTES.
You are such a rude arsehole,
I am running CentOS 5.4 and the latest version of Postfix it has on the
repository is version 2.3.3. After looking at the Postfix site I found out that
that version is no longer updated.
Is it worth downloading the source code for the latest stable version and
manually compile and install it?
On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 01:50:30PM -0400, Kaleb Hosie wrote:
I am running CentOS 5.4 and the latest version of Postfix it has on the
repository is version 2.3.3. After looking at the Postfix site I found out
that that version is no longer updated.
Is it worth downloading the source code
On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 1:50 PM, Kaleb Hosie kho...@spectraaluminum.com wrote:
I am running CentOS 5.4 and the latest version of Postfix it has on the
repository is version 2.3.3. After looking at the Postfix site I found out
that that version is no longer updated.
Is it worth downloading
I am confused by the following Postfix definition of
'smtpd_tls_auth_only' 'smtpd_tls_security_level' would appreciate
if someone could please help me understand this. TLS configuration is
new to me so I appologise for my ignorance and I did bother to review:
On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 1:50 PM, Kaleb Hosie kho...@spectraaluminum.com wrote:
I am running CentOS 5.4 and the latest version of Postfix it has on the
repository is version 2.3.3. After looking at the Postfix site I found out
that that version is no longer updated.
Is it worth downloading
On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 02:23:30PM -0400, Carlos Mennens wrote:
In my Postfix main.cf, I have the following TLS parameters:
smtpd_use_tls = yes #announce STARTTLS support to SMTP clients, but do
This is the Postfix 2.2 syntax. With 2.3 and later, use:
smtpd_tls_security_level = may
I am running CentOS 5.4 and the latest version of Postfix it has on the
repository is version 2.3.3. After looking at the Postfix site I found out
that that version is no longer updated.
Kaleb,
RedHat tends to backport security patches even for older products, when they
can. I personally
On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 2:32 PM, Victor Duchovni
victor.ducho...@morganstanley.com wrote:
On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 02:23:30PM -0400, Carlos Mennens wrote:
In my Postfix main.cf, I have the following TLS parameters:
smtpd_use_tls = yes #announce STARTTLS support to SMTP clients, but do
This
On 03/22/2010 02:23 AM, Matias wrote:
Hi,
I want to move away from postgrey to a sql based greylist service, so
that I can access the greylist database from more than one server.
I've been reading about sqlgrey, gps, gld, etc...
I've used postgrey and sqlgrey, but for the past few years
I've been using policydv2 for quite a while now.
It's easy to install and manage, it's under active development ( well maybe not
so active but oh well ) and it plays nice. I am using it for both greylisting
and accounting. Especially i found the accounting feature very useful, since my
primary
Robert Schetterer a écrit :
Am 23.03.2010 00:14, schrieb mouss:
Mauro Faccenda a écrit :
Hi Reinaldo,
On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 7:34 PM, Reinaldo de Carvalho
reinal...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 6:40 PM, Mauro Faccenda facce...@gmail.com wrote:
Alternative to that patch? I did
Luciano Mannucci a écrit :
On Mon, 22 Mar 2010 08:17:42 -0300
Leonardo Rodrigues leolis...@solutti.com.br wrote:
gld is very outdated, it couldnt handle medium to large traffic
when i used it.
I use gld on a dedicated server.
It scales very well :-)
Never had a problem either...
Leonardo Rodrigues a écrit :
gld is very outdated, it couldnt handle medium to large traffic when
i used it.
i switched to policyd and never had problems it's MySQL based
and can implement greylist and some other features.
i'm still using policyd v1, i didnt migrated to
On Wed, March 24, 2010 5:32 am, Victor Duchovni wrote:
Disable SASL authentication for un-encrypted connections.
Don't confuse SASL authentication (username/password typicall to verify
submission access rights) with session encryption (prevent passive wiretap
of session).
SASL and SSL are
And your point is ?
- mouss mo...@ml.netoyen.net wrote:
Leonardo Rodrigues a écrit :
note that v2 has nothing to do with v1. It is unfortunate to see the
same product name used for two different things. v1 was a single
thread
C program. v2 is a perl program (I like perl. this
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 2:23 AM, Matias matiassu...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
I want to move away from postgrey to a sql based greylist service, so that I
can access the greylist database from more than one server.
I've been reading about sqlgrey, gps, gld, etc...
Can you recommend any of
On 22-Mar-2010, at 05:17, Leonardo Rodrigues wrote:
you really should take a look on it.
http://www.policyd.org/
I did take a look at it, built the database for it, read the INSTALL
document very carefully.
I get to step 10.
10. Fire everything up and browse to the web gui to
On 23-Mar-2010, at 03:55, Bas Mevissen wrote:
On Tue, 2010-03-23 at 10:24 +0100, Ansgar Wiechers wrote:
On 2010-03-22 Bas Mevissen wrote:
Why catch-all? Because I often use the part before the @ as a
key to
see the origin of the e-mail when subscribing.
That's what address extension was
On 23-Mar-2010, at 19:31, LuKreme wrote:
user+extens...@example.com = possibly excepted.
ACCEPTED. Doh.
--
Windle shook his head sadly. Five exclamation marks, the sure sign of
an insane
mind. --Reaper Man
You must check the model of you communication device, that happent to
us the last week, into the pix or asa device must disable inspect
esmtp, this link could provide some help:
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/hw/vpndevc/ps2030/products_configuration_example09186a00806745b8.shtml
45 matches
Mail list logo
