Am 02.02.2011 04:43, schrieb Alan Batie:
While it's a much more minor matter, the ID suggestion *is* still
pertinent - that's *not* something a simple configuration hack will fix,
and it would be nice to have
Alan,
Postfix logs the ID whenever one is available, and it did in your case.
I'm
* Aggelos marma...@freemail.gr:
I have set up a postfix host that accepts and sends mail directly for a LAN.
The last lines in /etc/postfix/main.cf are like so:
#
smtpd_helo_required = yes
smtpd_helo_restrictions =
reject_invalid_hostname,
Remove,
If I understood correctly, this is how it should be set up:
smtpd_helo_required = yes
smtpd_helo_restrictions =
reject_invalid_hostname,
reject_unknown_client,
reject_unknown_hostname,
reject_non_fqdn_hostname,
* Aggelos marma...@freemail.gr:
If I understood correctly, this is how it should be set up:
Not understood correctly. Not at all!
smtpd_helo_required = yes
smtpd_helo_restrictions =
reject_invalid_hostname,
reject_unknown_client,
Sorry, I really don't seem to get it.
Can you post the complete filter section setup please?
* Ralf Hildebrandt ralf.hildebra...@charite.de:
The resulting set of restrictions after cleaning up:
smtpd_helo_required = yes
smtpd_helo_restrictions =
smtpd_client_restrictions =
hash:/etc/postfix/client_restrictions,
disable_vrfy_command = yes
smtpd_recipient_restrictions
on 02/02/2011 01:49 PM Ralf Hildebrandt wrote the following:
* Ralf Hildebrandt ralf.hildebra...@charite.de:
The resulting set of restrictions after cleaning up:
smtpd_helo_required = yes
smtpd_helo_restrictions =
smtpd_client_restrictions =
hash:/etc/postfix/client_restrictions,
* Aggelos marma...@freemail.gr:
smtpd_helo_restrictions should be empty?
Yes.
reject_rbl_client cbl.abuseat.org isn't needed?
It's included in zen
--
Ralf Hildebrandt
Geschäftsbereich IT | Abteilung Netzwerk
Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin
Campus Benjamin Franklin
Hindenburgdamm
on 02/02/2011 02:39 PM Ralf Hildebrandt wrote the following:
* Aggelos marma...@freemail.gr:
smtpd_helo_restrictions should be empty?
Yes.
reject_rbl_client cbl.abuseat.org isn't needed?
It's included in zen
Thanks again for your quick replies !
=:^)
On 02/02/11 01:41, Noel Jones wrote:
On 2/1/2011 7:18 PM, Dean Gibson (Mail Administrator) wrote:
Running postfix-2.2.10-1.2.1.el4_7.centos:
When I try to send eMail to a person who uses Yahoo! as their
eMail provider, but to a non-Yahoo domain, I get:
Feb 1 16:34:59 mail postfix/smtp[10551]:
On Wed, Feb 02, 2011 at 12:49:49PM +0100, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
* Ralf Hildebrandt ralf.hildebra...@charite.de:
The resulting set of restrictions after cleaning up:
And I'll throw in some nitpicks ...
smtpd_helo_required = yes
smtpd_helo_restrictions =
This being the default, the
Hi,
I've configured recipient_bcc_maps to capture outgoing mail to some
domains to debug delivery issues, i.e. some senders can't send mails to
yahoo and yahoo wants the full body. So I thought I could just capture
these mails using recipient_bcc_maps and later forward them to yahoo.
I've double
l...@ds.gauner.org:
Hi,
I've configured recipient_bcc_maps to capture outgoing mail to some
domains to debug delivery issues, i.e. some senders can't send mails to
yahoo and yahoo wants the full body. So I thought I could just capture
these mails using recipient_bcc_maps and later forward
dovecot_destination_recipient_limit = 1
I had this option in main.conf already.
Why did postconf -n not list it? Not even postconf does, uhm...
if it still doesn't work, tell us how you defined the dovecot
transport? is it a pipe based transport in master.cf?
Exactly.
dovecot unix -
Hi there,
Quick question about this error I saw in the logs just now.There
is a note about it on Ralf's page [
http://www.arschkrebs.de/postfix/postfix_unknown.shtml ], but I am
trying to work out if its a problem or not caused by my postfix
implementation. The server really has no
J4K:
Feb 2 17:09:28 logout postfix/smtpd[1599]: connect from unknown[unknown]
Feb 2 17:09:28 logout postfix/smtpd[1599]: lost connection after
CONNECT from unknown[unknown]
The client disconnected before Postfix could ask the KERNEL for
the client IP address. Either your server is too slow
On 02/02/2011 05:23 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
J4K:
Feb 2 17:09:28 logout postfix/smtpd[1599]: connect from unknown[unknown]
Feb 2 17:09:28 logout postfix/smtpd[1599]: lost connection after
CONNECT from unknown[unknown]
The client disconnected before Postfix could ask the KERNEL for
the
Hi,
Reading this page (English and French), http://www.email-way.com/
I decided to create a specific transport for the orange destination.
I just cannot find out which parameters I need to set to comply with :
**- The maximum number of simultaneous connections is limited to 3 per MX
is
On Wed, Feb 02, 2011 at 05:30:52PM +0100, J4K wrote:
The smtpd has a 'sleep 3' at the start of it. Might this have been the
cause? If so, then it served the purpose.
smtpd_recipient_restrictions = sleep 3,
permit_mynetworks,permit_sasl_authenticated,reject_unauth_destination,
On Wed, Feb 02, 2011 at 05:56:23PM +0100, St?phane MERLE wrote:
Reading this page (English and French), http://www.email-way.com/
I decided to create a specific transport for the orange destination.
I just cannot find out which parameters I need to set to comply with :
**- The maximum number
Hi,
Le 02/02/2011 18:49, Victor Duchovni a écrit :
On Wed, Feb 02, 2011 at 05:56:23PM +0100, St?phane MERLE wrote:
Reading this page (English and French), http://www.email-way.com/
I decided to create a specific transport for the orange destination.
I just cannot find out which parameters I
On Wed, Feb 02, 2011 at 07:03:38PM +0100, St?phane MERLE wrote:
**- The maximum number of simultaneous connections is limited to 3 per MX
**- Do not request more than a 1000 connections per hour
**- Send over a 100 emails per open connection
You can try:
Le 02/02/2011 19:12, Victor Duchovni a écrit :
On Wed, Feb 02, 2011 at 07:03:38PM +0100, St?phane MERLE wrote:
**- The maximum number of simultaneous connections is limited to 3 per MX
**- Do not request more than a 1000 connections per hour
**- Send over a 100 emails per open connection
On 02/02/2011 06:17 PM, Victor Duchovni wrote:
On Wed, Feb 02, 2011 at 05:30:52PM +0100, J4K wrote:
The smtpd has a 'sleep 3' at the start of it. Might this have been the
cause? If so, then it served the purpose.
smtpd_recipient_restrictions = sleep 3,
After watching the recent thread about filtering restrictions, it's
got me curious as to whether mine are optimal. I've recently added
support for backscatterer checking in my restrictions, and I moved
Stan's fqrdns.pcre check higher in my list per his suggestion in an
earlier thread. Mine now
On Wed, Feb 02, 2011 at 07:16:12PM +0100, St?phane MERLE wrote:
Yes, overly prescriptive limits are generally misguided. If you are
sending legitimate email, often the simplest solution is to be
white-listed
by the provider, and use the sensible default limits built-in to Postfix,
with
Le 02/02/2011 16:55, Andy Spiegl a écrit :
dovecot_destination_recipient_limit = 1
I had this option in main.conf already.
Why did postconf -n not list it? Not even postconf does, uhm...
the postconf command doesn't show custom variables, and
{foobar}_destination_recipient_limit is a custom
* Steve Jenkins stevejenk...@gmail.com:
After watching the recent thread about filtering restrictions, it's got
me curious as to whether mine are optimal.
Beauty, eye of the beholder, and all that fuzz
smtpd_recipient_restrictions =
permit_sasl_authenticated,
On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 11:09 AM, Ralf Hildebrandt
ralf.hildebra...@charite.de wrote:
check_sender_access hash:/etc/postfix/check_backscatterer,
The check_backscatterer file setup is as suggested on
http://www.backscatterer.org/?target=usage, with the exception of
hash instead of dbm.
Le 02/02/2011 19:28, Steve Jenkins a écrit :
After watching the recent thread about filtering restrictions, it's
got me curious as to whether mine are optimal. I've recently added
support for backscatterer checking in my restrictions, and I moved
Stan's fqrdns.pcre check higher in my list per
* Steve Jenkins stevejenk...@gmail.com:
Have you tried cdb?
My postconf -m says:
btree
cidr
environ
hash
ldap
mysql
nis
pcre
proxy
regexp
static
unix
So I'd have to rebuild with cdb support explicitly.
Yes.
But before I go through the steps of doing that, what's the
On 02/02/2011 10:28 AM, Steve Jenkins wrote:
After watching the recent thread about filtering restrictions, it's
got me curious as to whether mine are optimal. I've recently added
support for backscatterer checking in my restrictions, and I moved
Stan's fqrdns.pcre check higher in my list per
On 02/02/2011 12:05 PM, Joe wrote:
On 02/02/2011 10:28 AM, Steve Jenkins wrote:
After watching the recent thread about filtering restrictions, it's
got me curious as to whether mine are optimal. I've recently added
support for backscatterer checking in my restrictions, and I moved
Stan's
On 2/2/2011 2:05 PM, Joe wrote:
On 02/02/2011 10:28 AM, Steve Jenkins wrote:
After watching the recent thread about filtering
restrictions, it's
got me curious as to whether mine are optimal. I've recently
added
support for backscatterer checking in my restrictions, and I
moved
Stan's
On 2/2/2011 1:48 PM, mouss wrote:
Le 02/02/2011 19:28, Steve Jenkins a écrit :
smtpd_recipient_restrictions =
permit_sasl_authenticated,
permit_mynetworks,
reject_unauth_destination,
check_client_access pcre:/etc/postfix/fqrdns.pcre,
the postconf command doesn't show custom variables, and
{foobar}_destination_recipient_limit is a custom var.
Oh, I see.
It's up to you. as far as your return a DSN, be it relayed or
delivered, I'd say it's ok. DSN seems to cause lot of debates. so
let's not get into that trap!
:-)
Actually
On 2/2/11 7:23 PM, JKL wrote:
On 02/02/2011 06:17 PM, Victor Duchovni wrote:
On Wed, Feb 02, 2011 at 05:30:52PM +0100, J4K wrote:
The smtpd has a 'sleep 3' at the start of it. Might this have been the
cause? If so, then it served the purpose.
smtpd_recipient_restrictions = sleep 3,
On Wed, Feb 02, 2011 at 09:36:52PM +0100, Andy Spiegl wrote:
the postconf command doesn't show custom variables, and
{foobar}_destination_recipient_limit is a custom var.
Oh, I see.
It's up to you. as far as your return a DSN, be it relayed or
delivered, I'd say it's ok. DSN seems to
I'm working on replacing an ageing Posfix install with a new server.
On the old and new server we use virtual domains.
On the old server we login with: username.domain.com
On the new server Postfix is configured to allow login as: usern...@domain.com
I'd actually rather prefer the new format,
On Wed, Feb 02, 2011 at 05:10:08PM -0500, Matt wrote:
I'm working on replacing an ageing Posfix install with a new server.
On the old and new server we use virtual domains.
On the old server we login with: username.domain.com
On the new server Postfix is configured to allow login as:
On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 5:10 PM, Matt mhop...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm working on replacing an ageing Posfix install with a new server.
On the old and new server we use virtual domains.
On the old server we login with: username.domain.com
On the new server Postfix is configured to allow login as:
JKL put forth on 2/2/2011 12:23 PM:
On 02/02/2011 06:17 PM, Victor Duchovni wrote:
On Wed, Feb 02, 2011 at 05:30:52PM +0100, J4K wrote:
The smtpd has a 'sleep 3' at the start of it. Might this have been the
cause? If so, then it served the purpose.
smtpd_recipient_restrictions = sleep
On 2/2/2011 5:25 PM, Victor Duchovni wrote:
On Wed, Feb 02, 2011 at 05:10:08PM -0500, Matt wrote:
I'm working on replacing an ageing Posfix install with a new server.
On the old and new server we use virtual domains.
On the old server we login with: username.domain.com
On the new server
On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 2:33 PM, Stan Hoeppner s...@hardwarefreak.com wrote:
In the mean time, maybe give this a go. 1600+ expressions matching rDNS
patterns of many millions of broadband IPs worldwide that shouldn't be sending
direct SMTP. Catches quite a bit that PBL/CBL/SORBS-DYNA/etc don't
On Wed, Feb 02, 2011 at 05:48:20PM -0500, Jerrale G wrote:
If you use dovecot for imap/pop3, you should compile postfix with
CFLAG -DDEF_SERVER_SASL_TYPE=\dovecot\ Then, dovecot does allow
you to configure the auth to do what you like, such as resolving
sasl_username to the real username in
On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 5:31 PM, Mauricio Tavares raubvo...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 5:10 PM, Matt mhop...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm working on replacing an ageing Posfix install with a new server.
On the old and new server we use virtual domains.
On the old server we login with:
On 2/2/2011 6:27 PM, Matt wrote:
On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 5:31 PM, Mauricio Tavaresraubvo...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 5:10 PM, Mattmhop...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm working on replacing an ageing Posfix install with a new server.
On the old and new server we use virtual domains.
On
Jeroen Geilman put forth on 2/2/2011 2:56 PM:
Debian won't have 2.8 in stable until at least 2013, although you may be able
to
get it as a backport later this year:
http://packages.debian.org/search?keywords=postfix
They lag behind something awful.
You're smoke'n crack. ;) 2.7.1 was
on 02/02/2011 03:56 PM /dev/rob0 wrote the following:
On Wed, Feb 02, 2011 at 12:49:49PM +0100, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
* Ralf Hildebrandt ralf.hildebra...@charite.de:
The resulting set of restrictions after cleaning up:
And I'll throw in some nitpicks ...
smtpd_helo_required = yes
on 02/03/2011 05:24 AM Aggelos wrote the following:
With that setup, if I wanted to accept mail from a specific Internet IP,
which would otherwise be filtered out, how would I do it?
I meant clients that are rejected like so:
Feb 3 06:46:59 viper postfix/smtpd[3924]: NOQUEUE: reject: RCPT
50 matches
Mail list logo
