Hi Wietse,
thanks a lot for your help.
One last question: in order to redirect mail from the original recipient(s) to
the catch-all address I'm using address rewriting with canonical maps. Is this
the best way to do it? Or should I rely on virtual aliasing for some reason?
My configuration:
Hi,
I'm new in this list but I need your help.
Every time my server reboots, the file transportList and
transportList.db are replaced by an old version,
without the new domains added last month.
I can not find any explanation and how its happens!
thanks in advance!
--
:) cumprimentos
Hi Everyone,
We are using postfix as an edge mx gateway for incoming mails.
Our company has 3 domain names (@abpni.co.uk, @abpni.com, @abpni.net).
@abpni.co.uk is our main domain.
Each user may have a few aliases. I list these aliases in the table
which virtual_alias_maps points to. To take
Check the init scripts if you have any[depending on your Linux(Debian,
CentOS, Suse or Slackware) could change], postfix config, or a backup
program could be rewriting the transportList with the old one. Check and
tell us :D.
Best regards.
Participe en Universidad 2012, del 13 al 17 de
Hi list,
I am struggling to find a solution for a problem I have when relaying
mails from Postfix to Exchange server 2010.
The problem is that although messages are correctly sent, they do not
show up in the Sent Items folder of Exchange, I have tried many
options, Exchange administrators, say
On 10.02.2012 18:21, Simone Sanna wrote:
Hi list,
I am struggling to find a solution for a problem I have when relaying
mails from Postfix to Exchange server 2010.
The problem is that although messages are correctly sent, they do not
show up in the Sent Items folder of Exchange, I have tried
On 2/10/2012 6:33 AM, Jonathan Tripathy wrote:
Hi Everyone,
We are using postfix as an edge mx gateway for incoming mails.
Our company has 3 domain names (@abpni.co.uk, @abpni.com,
@abpni.net). @abpni.co.uk is our main domain.
...
I also want all 3 of our domains to be able to be used,
On 2/10/2012 2:36 AM, Fabio Sangiovanni wrote:
Hi Wietse,
thanks a lot for your help.
One last question: in order to redirect mail from the original recipient(s)
to the catch-all address I'm using address rewriting with canonical maps. Is
this the best way to do it? Or should I rely on
On 2/10/2012 2:36 AM, Fabio Sangiovanni wrote:
Hi Wietse,
thanks a lot for your help.
One last question: in order to redirect mail from the original recipient(s)
to the catch-all address I'm using address rewriting with canonical maps. Is
this the best way to do it? Or should I rely on
Hi Noel,
thanks, I'll follow your advice.
Fabio
Il giorno 10/feb/2012, alle ore 17:44, Noel Jones ha scritto:
On 2/10/2012 2:36 AM, Fabio Sangiovanni wrote:
Hi Wietse,
thanks a lot for your help.
One last question: in order to redirect mail from the original recipient(s)
to the
Hello Postfix Users :)
I noticed:
http://www.postfix.org/POSTSCREEN_README.html#after_220
When a good client passes the deep protocol tests, postscreen(8) adds
the client to the temporary whitelist but it cannot hand off the
live connection to a Postfix SMTP server process in the middle of
On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 07:11:50PM +0100, Chris wrote:
I noticed:
http://www.postfix.org/POSTSCREEN_README.html#after_220
When a good client passes the deep protocol tests, postscreen(8)
adds the client to the temporary whitelist but it cannot hand
off the live connection to a Postfix
2012/2/10 Ralf Hildebrandt ralf.hildebra...@charite.de:
* Chris xchris...@googlemail.com:
Hello Postfix Users :)
I noticed:
http://www.postfix.org/POSTSCREEN_README.html#after_220
When a good client passes the deep protocol tests, postscreen(8) adds
the client to the temporary whitelist
* Chris xchris...@googlemail.com:
If you let the MX share one memcache instance, the second MX to
receive a connection will immediately accept it. Works like a charm
here.
Okay, I see. That would be a solution.
How did you realize that?
On both my boxes I'm using:
Chris:
Hello Postfix Users :)
I noticed:
http://www.postfix.org/POSTSCREEN_README.html#after_220
When a good client passes the deep protocol tests, postscreen(8) adds
the client to the temporary whitelist but it cannot hand off the
live connection to a Postfix SMTP server process in
2012/2/10 /dev/rob0 r...@gmx.co.uk:
On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 07:11:50PM +0100, Chris wrote:
I noticed:
http://www.postfix.org/POSTSCREEN_README.html#after_220
When a good client passes the deep protocol tests, postscreen(8)
adds the client to the temporary whitelist but it cannot hand
* Chris xchris...@googlemail.com:
Read a bit more. It IS disabled unless you specifically enable it.
Postscreen? Or what do you mean?
The deep inspection and postscreen isn't enabled as well (I think)
--
Ralf Hildebrandt
Geschäftsbereich IT | Abteilung Netzwerk
Charité -
2012/2/10 Ralf Hildebrandt ralf.hildebra...@charite.de:
* Chris xchris...@googlemail.com:
If you let the MX share one memcache instance, the second MX to
receive a connection will immediately accept it. Works like a charm
here.
Okay, I see. That would be a solution.
How did you realize
2012/2/10 Ralf Hildebrandt ralf.hildebra...@charite.de:
* Chris xchris...@googlemail.com:
Read a bit more. It IS disabled unless you specifically enable it.
Postscreen? Or what do you mean?
The deep inspection and postscreen isn't enabled as well (I think)
You mean the deep protocol
* Chris xchris...@googlemail.com:
The deep inspection and postscreen isn't enabled as well (I think)
You mean the deep protocol tests?
The stuff with the deep in it, yes
Can I disable these deep protocol tests in postscreen?
By default they're not enabled :) according to
Chris:
2012/2/10 Ralf Hildebrandt ralf.hildebra...@charite.de:
* Chris xchris...@googlemail.com:
Read a bit more. It IS disabled unless you specifically enable it.
Postscreen? Or what do you mean?
The deep inspection and postscreen isn't enabled as well (I think)
You mean the
2012/2/10 Ralf Hildebrandt ralf.hildebra...@charite.de:
* Chris xchris...@googlemail.com:
The deep inspection and postscreen isn't enabled as well (I think)
You mean the deep protocol tests?
The stuff with the deep in it, yes
Can I disable these deep protocol tests in postscreen?
By
2012/2/10 Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org:
Chris:
2012/2/10 Ralf Hildebrandt ralf.hildebra...@charite.de:
* Chris xchris...@googlemail.com:
Read a bit more. It IS disabled unless you specifically enable it.
Postscreen? Or what do you mean?
The deep inspection and postscreen
I'm posting this to the postfix list rather than the FreeBSD list
because I've found the level of expertise here to be almost
unsurpassed.
In trying to substitute postfix for sendmail on FreeBSD 8.0, I've come
across a problem with mail sent from the command line (including mail
from the syslogd
On Feb 10, 2012, at 3:42 PM, Jorge Luis Gonzalez wrote:
I'm posting this to the postfix list rather than the FreeBSD list
because I've found the level of expertise here to be almost
unsurpassed.
In trying to substitute postfix for sendmail on FreeBSD 8.0, I've come
across a problem with
On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 3:50 PM, CSS c...@morefoo.com wrote:
On Feb 10, 2012, at 3:42 PM, Jorge Luis Gonzalez wrote:
I'm posting this to the postfix list rather than the FreeBSD list
because I've found the level of expertise here to be almost
unsurpassed.
In trying to substitute postfix
Here are all the sendmail and postfix entries in rc.conf:
sendmail_enable=NO
sendmail_submit_enable=NO
sendmail_outbound_enable=NO
sendmail_msp_queue_enable=NO
postfix_enable=YES
dovecot_enable=YES
On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 4:44 PM, CSS c...@morefoo.com wrote:
Drop all that and put in
Jorge Luis Gonzalez:
#
# Execute the Postfix sendmail program, named /usr/local/sbin/sendmail
#
sendmail/usr/local/sbin/sendmail
send-mail /usr/local/sbin/sendmail
mailq /usr/local/sbin/sendmail
newaliases/usr/local/sbin/sendmail
On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 7:11 PM, Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org wrote:
mailer.conf settings work only when:
1) /usr/sbin/sendmail is a symlink to /usr/sbin/mailwrapper, like this:
lrwxr-xr-x 1 root wheel 21 Feb 17 2011 /usr/sbin/sendmail -
/usr/sbin/mailwrapper
Precisely what I
On 2/10/2012 12:44 PM, Chris wrote:
2012/2/10 Ralf Hildebrandt ralf.hildebra...@charite.de:
The deep inspection and postscreen isn't enabled as well (I think)
You mean the deep protocol tests? Can I disable these deep
protocol tests in postscreen?
I find it interesting that you ignored
Jorge Luis Gonzalez:
lrwxr-xr-x 1 root wheel 21 Feb 8 16:20 /usr/sbin/sendmail -
/usr/sbin/mailwrapper
What happens when you execute /usr/sbin/mailwrapper by hand?
(it should complain about no mapping in /etc/mail/mailer.conf).
AND
2) Your mail software invokes /usr/sbin/sendmail,
On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 8:17 PM, Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org wrote:
What happens when you execute /usr/sbin/mailwrapper by hand?
(it should complain about no mapping in /etc/mail/mailer.conf).
[jorge@satyr ~]$ /usr/sbin/mailwrapper -oem -oi jorge /etc/motd
WARNING: RunAsUser for MSP
On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 6:54 PM, Jim Long ja...@umpquanet.com wrote:
I should add:
On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 03:44:16PM -0800, Jim Long wrote:
...
(Now confirm that the sendmail processes are gone:)
# ps -auxww | grep [s]endmail
#
(Good, no output from ps | grep)
(Now try to start sendmail)
Jorge Luis Gonzalez:
[ Charset ISO-8859-1 unsupported, converting... ]
On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 8:17 PM, Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org wrote:
What happens when you execute /usr/sbin/mailwrapper by hand?
(it should complain about no mapping in /etc/mail/mailer.conf).
[jorge@satyr ~]$
Jorge Luis Gonzalez:
[ Charset ISO-8859-1 unsupported, converting... ]
On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 8:17 PM, Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org wrote:
What happens when you execute /usr/sbin/mailwrapper by hand?
(it should complain about no mapping in /etc/mail/mailer.conf).
[jorge@satyr ~]$
On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 10:15 PM, Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org wrote:
What happens when you execute /usr/sbin/mailwrapper by hand?
(it should complain about no mapping in /etc/mail/mailer.conf).
[jorge@satyr ~]$ /usr/sbin/mailwrapper -oem -oi jorge /etc/motd
WARNING: RunAsUser for
On Feb 10, 2012, at 10:29 PM, Jorge Luis Gonzalez wrote:
On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 10:15 PM, Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org wrote:
What happens when you execute /usr/sbin/mailwrapper by hand?
(it should complain about no mapping in /etc/mail/mailer.conf).
[jorge@satyr ~]$
Thank you for the reply and sorry for the delay in responding.
I'd like to know if anyone here has any thoughts or opinions about the
best linux filesystem to use for an email system. There will be some
small amount of website data on the system (including webmail to read
the emails),
I'd like to know if anyone here has any thoughts or opinions about the
best linux filesystem to use for an email system. There will be some
small amount of website data on the system (including webmail to read
the emails), although I could move that to another partition if need
be.
Anyone
On 2/10/2012 10:33 PM, Ori Bani wrote:
On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 3:51 PM, Stan Hoeppner s...@hardwarefreak.com wrote:
On 2/8/2012 8:24 PM, Bill Cole wrote:
I would stay away from btrfs until it is much more mature. As a general
rule (very general) mail systems stress allocation and metadata
hi Ralf ,
Thanks for help me .
with the below expression its is showing me the logs for both from= and
to= logs what i wanted was only
match the expression from each like only from=anythingh...@gmail.com lines
i know this will be tricky i m to trying to solve this expression if u can
then pls
41 matches
Mail list logo
