Has anyone had any sort of issue with a check like this:
/(unknown|localhost|localdomain|lan|home|example|local|lokal)$/ REJECT
Mailserver name in private namespace
I’ve noticed a lot of commercial non-spam email hitting this recently (for
example, landmarktheatres ticket confirmations, a
Am 14.02.2015 um 11:30 schrieb LuKreme:
Has anyone had any sort of issue with a check like this:
/(unknown|localhost|localdomain|lan|home|example|local|lokal)$/ REJECT
Mailserver name in private namespace
I’ve noticed a lot of commercial non-spam email hitting this recently (for
example,
On Sat, 14 Feb 2015 01:50:09 +0100, Benny Pedersen stated:
since no one have crystall
balls here
Funny ... I think you meant, Has a crystal ball here.
--
Jerry
Brilliant, thanks.
On 14/02/2015 14:19, li...@rhsoft.net
wrote:
Am 14.02.2015 um 15:13 schrieb Nick Howitt:
Up to now I have been using postfix as an
internal server at home
relaying messages from
Thanks for the smtp -v/relay -v logging. Your logging confirms
that there is a bogus error talking to your bounce daemon.
Although Postfix detects the bogus error, unfortunately it produces
no informative logging for this particular error.
Questions:
- What is the output from uname -a? Postfix
Hi,
Up to now I have been using postfix as an internal server at home
relaying messages from internal clients to my ISP, but also
receiving mail on port 25.
Now my wife has an Android, I'd like to enable her to send mail
through the server when out and about. With
Am 14.02.2015 um 15:13 schrieb Nick Howitt:
Up to now I have been using postfix as an internal server at home
relaying messages from internal clients to my ISP, but also receiving
mail on port 25.
Now my wife has an Android, I'd like to enable her to send mail through
the server when out and
On Sat, Feb 14, 2015 at 12:53:46PM -0500, Brad s wrote:
# postconf -n
smtpd_recipient_restrictions =
permit_mynetworks,
permit_sasl_authenticated,
reject_non_fqdn_recipient,
reject_unauth_pipelining,
reject_invalid_hostname,
reject_rbl_client
Am 14.02.2015 um 19:16 schrieb Viktor Dukhovni:
On Sat, Feb 14, 2015 at 12:53:46PM -0500, Brad s wrote:
# postconf -n
smtpd_recipient_restrictions =
permit_mynetworks,
permit_sasl_authenticated,
reject_non_fqdn_recipient,
reject_unauth_pipelining,
Mats Luspa:
Hello!
Thank you for the exhausting explanation of the problem.
Here you got the requested information about the system:
root@outgoingmail-2:~# uname -a
Linux outgoingmail-2 3.16.0-29-generic #39-Ubuntu SMP Mon Dec 15
22:27:29 UTC 2014 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
What
? Verbose logs in no way indicates software functioning properly.
If I add my ip address to mynetworks (which is dead wrong) I can see the
mail make it farther in the system but then gets caught in match classes
for the destination domain (which is also dead wrong).
it should be 0.0.0.0 any IP
Hello!
Thank you for the exhausting explanation of the problem.
Here you got the requested information about the system:
root@outgoingmail-2:~# uname -a
Linux outgoingmail-2 3.16.0-29-generic #39-Ubuntu SMP Mon Dec 15
22:27:29 UTC 2014 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
root@outgoingmail-2:~#
# postconf -n
broken_sasl_auth_clients = yes
command_directory = /usr/local/sbin
config_directory = /usr/local/etc/postfix
daemon_directory = /usr/local/libexec/postfix
data_directory = /var/db/postfix
debug_peer_level = 4
debug_peer_list = 127.0.0.1
debugger_command =
Am 14.02.2015 um 18:53 schrieb Brad s:
# postconf -n
postconf: warning: /usr/local/etc/postfix/main.cf http://main.cf/: unused
parameter: smtpd_relay_restriction=permit_mynetworks, permit_sasl_authenticated,
defer_unauth_destination
postconf: warning: /usr/local/etc/postfix/main.cf
Actually the logs are pretty clear
match_list_match: ool-4355399b.dyn.optonline.net: no match
Where the possibility of there ever being a match are slim and none.
The server is on a dynamic network.
The only way that info is found is via verbose logging.
I UNDERSTAND THAT POSTFIX WON'T SHUT UP
Am 14.02.2015 um 19:36 schrieb Brad s:
Actually the logs are pretty clear
then you have no problem to solve?
match_list_match:ool-4355399b.dyn.optonline.net
http://ool-4355399b.dyn.optonline.net: no match
Where the possibility of there ever being a match are slim and none.
The server is
Am 14.02.2015 um 20:14 schrieb Brad s:
? Verbose logs in no way indicates software functioning properly.
unbelievebale
* you don't find the problem otherwise the thread won't exist
* nobody but you is interested in verbose logs
* so if you need help from others provide the informations
Taking another look at it I think I have over complicated the first part
of my example.
I should probably go with
mydomain = klam.ca
and then something like this where needed
smtp_tls_cert_file = //$mydomain.mail.pem
smtp_tls_key_file = //$mydomain.mail.key
sorry to have bugged
Wietse Venema:
Mats Luspa:
Hello!
Thank you for the exhausting explanation of the problem.
Here you got the requested information about the system:
root@outgoingmail-2:~# uname -a
Linux outgoingmail-2 3.16.0-29-generic #39-Ubuntu SMP Mon Dec 15
22:27:29 UTC 2014 x86_64 x86_64
Here are your logs without verbose logging
https://bpaste.net/show/79c1ea5f65e6
Can see anything now. But you were very insistent.
On Sat, Feb 14, 2015 at 1:50 PM, li...@rhsoft.net li...@rhsoft.net wrote:
Am 14.02.2015 um 19:36 schrieb Brad s:
Actually the logs are pretty clear
then you
On Sat, Feb 14, 2015 at 02:14:40PM -0500, Brad s wrote:
If I add my ip address to mynetworks (which is dead wrong) I can see the
mail make it farther in the system but then gets caught in match classes
for the destination domain (which is also dead wrong).
Have you fixed your main.cf settings
While looking at the various Postfix configurations that I deal with I
realized that /mynetworks/ is configured identically in all four setups.
In the three installations I support there no local users, and the
people who belonging to those domains all use port submission (587) to
send and
Wietse Venema:
$ uname -a
Linux ubuntu1410 3.16.0-30-generic #40-Ubuntu SMP Mon Jan 12 22:06:37 UTC
2015 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
On this system, Postfix 2.11.1 logging shows that the bounce service
works as expected:
Feb 14 14:33:21 ubuntu1410 postfix/smtp[1383]: 487714329E:
John:
While looking at the various Postfix configurations that I deal with I
realized that /mynetworks/ is configured identically in all four setups.
In the three installations I support there no local users, and the
people who belonging to those domains all use port submission (587) to
On Sat, Feb 14, 2015 at 09:17:50PM +, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
transport:
debu...@example.net debug:[127.0.0.1]:52
Send a single message to debu...@example.com, and post the resulting
trace file, which will be in the Postfix queue directory.
And, unlike me, be consistent
You should refrain from being so condescending.
it's fixed. because of verbose logging pointing me to the error, slowly I
weeded it down to a broken variable in relay_recipient_maps.
So, you were looking in the wrong place.
On Sat, Feb 14, 2015 at 2:35 PM, li...@rhsoft.net li...@rhsoft.net wrote:
Am 14.02.2015 um 20:29 schrieb Brad s:
Here are your logs without verbose logging
https://bpaste.net/show/79c1ea5f65e6
Can see anything now. But you were very insistent
forget it - i have no nicer words than you are not able to privide basic
informations and hence should refrain to maintain
Are parameters case sensitive, are myDomain and mydomain the same or
different.
I have read the Postfix configuration man page and several other texts,
but I have not found any specific info.
I have four almost identical servers, my family server which I use for
experimentation and three others
On Sat, Feb 14, 2015 at 03:30:45PM -0500, Wietse Venema wrote:
In conclusion, whatever the problem is, it is not in Postfix. My
test shows that it works fine in a non-container environment on what
should basically be the same kernel as what you use.
An strace of an smtp(8) delivery agent
Ok, thanks for your engagement in this topic. Maybe there can be a
problem with the host kernel also.
I will test to install this as an Docker on the same host machine and
see what happens.
/Regards Mats
Quoting Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org:
Wietse Venema:
$ uname -a
Linux
On 14 Feb 2015, at 04:39 , li...@rhsoft.net wrote:
Am 14.02.2015 um 11:30 schrieb LuKreme:
Has anyone had any sort of issue with a check like this:
/(unknown|localhost|localdomain|lan|home|example|local|lokal)$/ REJECT
Mailserver name in private namespace
I’ve noticed a lot of commercial
Am 14.02.2015 um 23:37 schrieb LuKreme:
On 14 Feb 2015, at 04:39 , li...@rhsoft.net wrote:
Am 14.02.2015 um 11:30 schrieb LuKreme:
Has anyone had any sort of issue with a check like this:
/(unknown|localhost|localdomain|lan|home|example|local|lokal)$/ REJECT
Mailserver name in private
Mats Luspa:
connect(16, {sa_family=AF_LOCAL, sun_path=private/bounce}, 110) = 0
poll([{fd=16, events=POLLOUT}], 1, 360) = 1 ([{fd=16, revents=POLLOUT}])
write(16, nrequest\\0flags\\0queue_id\00067C9..., 469) = 469
poll([{fd=16, events=POLLIN}], 1, 360) = 1 ([{fd=16,
On 14 Feb 2015, at 15:47 , li...@rhsoft.net wrote:
Am 14.02.2015 um 23:37 schrieb LuKreme:
On 14 Feb 2015, at 04:39 , li...@rhsoft.net wrote:
Am 14.02.2015 um 11:30 schrieb LuKreme:
Has anyone had any sort of issue with a check like this:
Yes, apparmor is used. But I'm not an expert in configuring apparmor.
But maybe something there is preventing the linux-container to read
some part of the file system that affects postfix.
I must check it.
/Mats
Quoting Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org:
Mats Luspa:
connect(16,
Am 14.02.2015 um 22:34 schrieb Brad s:
You should refrain from being so condescending
if you would just do what people are telling you
it's fixed. because of verbose logging pointing me to the error, slowly
I weeded it down to a broken variable in relay_recipient_maps
pretty sure with the
Hello!
Thanks for your suggestion. It seems to be some Permission denies in
the trace-file that comes below:
--
read(15, \27\3\3\0\340, 5)= 5
read(15,
On 14 Feb 2015, at 07:13 , Nick Howitt n...@howitts.co.uk wrote:
Unfortunately this opens up user/pass authenticated relaying to port 25 as
well as 587 and is vulnerable to to being brute forced. It appears at the
moment that just about all brute forcing happens on port 25. Is there any
LuKreme:
# postconf -d | grep spf
spf_explanation =
spf_global_whitelist = no
spf_local_policy =
spf_mark_only = no
spf_patch_version = 1.1.0
spf_received_header = yes
spf_reject_code = 550
spf_reject_dsn = 5.7.1
% postconf -d|grep spf
%
And I run the latest Postfix version. I take no
On 14 Feb 2015, at 15:49 , Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org wrote:
% postconf -d|grep spf
%
And I run the latest Postfix version. I take no responsibility for
bugs that are added after I release Postfix.
Yes, I will rebuild from the 2.11 source.
--
++?++ Out of Cheese Error. Redo
Am 15.02.2015 um 00:02 schrieb LuKreme:
that's a *not offical* postfix with discouraged pacthes
Is it? dammit.
I built with
SYSLIBS = -L/usr/local/lib -lpcre -L/usr/local/lib -lsasl2 -lpam -lcrypt
-L/usr/local/lib -Wl,-rpath,/usr/local/lib -lssl -lcrypto -L/usr/local/lib
-lspf2
Hi,
I have a fedora20 server with postfix-2.10.5 I'm trying to configure
rate limiting for outbound mail to google, yahoo, etc, in hopes of not
only building a better reputation with these systems, but also to
prevent my outbound pipe from being saturated.
I've configured a few of the
On Feb 14, 2015, at 16.14, John j...@klam.ca wrote:
Does mynetworks have to contain anything other than 127.0.0.1/8 and ::1/128.
for whatever it's worth, my personal preference is to, as a rule, always set
mynetworks to empty. i make an effort to not allow relaying based on source ip
Alex Regan:
Hi,
I have a fedora20 server with postfix-2.10.5 I'm trying to configure
rate limiting for outbound mail to google, yahoo, etc, in hopes of not
only building a better reputation with these systems, but also to
prevent my outbound pipe from being saturated.
I've configured
Mats Luspa:
Yes, apparmor is used. But I'm not an expert in configuring apparmor.
But maybe something there is preventing the linux-container to read
some part of the file system that affects postfix.
I must check it.
Meanwhile, I have added logging to the mail_command_client()
On Sat, Feb 14, 2015 at 11:43:43PM +0100, Mats Luspa wrote:
Thanks for your suggestion. It seems to be some Permission denies in the
trace-file that comes below:
socket(PF_LOCAL, SOCK_STREAM, 0)= 16
fcntl(16, F_GETFL) = 0x2 (flags O_RDWR)
fcntl(16, F_SETFL,
It can also be a bug in the kernel according to this post:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/1390223
It's the same kind of behaviour and Ubuntu utopic (and event postfix)
is mentioned. I'm running the same version of kernel on the host
server which is mentioned in the
47 matches
Mail list logo
