On Sun, Apr 26, 2015 at 2:20 PM, Steve Jenkins
wrote:
> I should have mentioned that I actually did that, once I couldn't find
> Stan's site:
>
> https://github.com/stevejenkins/hardwarefreak.com-fqrdns.pcre
>
For those who are using it, I've replaced it with a version from March 2013
instead of
On 04/27/2015 10:57 PM, Alex Regan wrote:
>>
>> check_client_access uses the verified name, which is more conservative.
>> I wasn't convinced this was a good idea, so I played it safe.
>
> So check_client_access is performing an additional DNS query on the
> hostname to check if it matches the IP
Hi,
On 04/27/2015 10:44 PM, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
On 04/27/2015 06:55 PM, Alex Regan wrote:
Hi,
I assume that means you use it in header_checks?
It's still a client check; I have
smtpd_recipient_restrictions =
...
check_client_access pcre:$maps/generic_rdns.pcre,
If you
Hi,
On 04/27/2015 10:44 PM, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
On 04/27/2015 06:55 PM, Alex Regan wrote:
Hi,
I assume that means you use it in header_checks?
It's still a client check; I have
smtpd_recipient_restrictions =
...
check_client_access pcre:$maps/generic_rdns.pcre,
If you
On 04/27/2015 06:55 PM, Alex Regan wrote:
> Hi,
>
>>> I assume that means you use it in header_checks?
>>
>> It's still a client check; I have
>>
>>smtpd_recipient_restrictions =
>> ...
>> check_client_access pcre:$maps/generic_rdns.pcre,
>
> If you're using a version of postfix lat
Hi,
I assume that means you use it in header_checks?
It's still a client check; I have
smtpd_recipient_restrictions =
...
check_client_access pcre:$maps/generic_rdns.pcre,
If you're using a version of postfix later than 2.6, you should be using
check_reverse_client_hostname_ac
We've been using postscreen and dspam for quite some time but in the past
couple months more spam is making it through. I realize there's no
one-size-fits-all approach but because dspam isn't actively developed anymore
I've started looking around and am curious what others are using. Is
amavisd
On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 12:36:19PM -0400, Charles Marcus wrote:
> On 4/6/2015 5:31 AM, Sebastian Nielsen wrote:
> > IMHO I find it better to only allow submission from trusted nets.
>
> So, you prefer to cripple your users by not allowing them to send email
> when outside the office?
This threa
On 4/27/2015 11:21 AM, Alex Regan wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have a fedora20 system with postfix-2.10.5 and trying to figure
> out sender_restrictions and client_restrictions and how access
> tables work.
>
> I've read the first five google results, including the access(5) man
> page, and don't understan
On 4/6/2015 5:31 AM, Sebastian Nielsen wrote:
> IMHO I find it better to only allow submission from trusted nets.
So, you prefer to cripple your users by not allowing them to send email
when outside the office?
> Better to disable authentication completely, and completely disable mail
> submiss
Hi,
I have a fedora20 system with postfix-2.10.5 and trying to figure out
sender_restrictions and client_restrictions and how access tables work.
I've read the first five google results, including the access(5) man
page, and don't understand the pattern matching.
How can I match all users i
On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 03:12:04PM +, Peter Berghold wrote:
> Apr 27 10:58:50 chicweb0 postfix/smtpd[13505]: 7DC243FC1CC: client=
> oldmule.templefindwindow.com[23.89.2.18]
When was this address added to any of the RBLs you're using?
> > Output of postconf -n
>
> content_filter = scan:127.0
On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 07:12:46AM -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
> > For the parameters maximal_queue_lifetime? and bounce_queue_lifetime
> > default values are 5d (5 days).? Due to overquota, the mail remains in the
> > queue for 5 days.? Is there a way by which a sender can be notified that
> > ma
Kristjan Nii:
> Apr 22 16:55:01 mailhost postfix/qmgr[30648]: E2A36C84B2:
> from=, size=7385, nrcpt=1 (queue active)
> Apr 22 16:55:22 mailhost postfix/smtp[23649]: E2A36C84B2: enabling PIX
> workarounds: disable_esmtp delay_dotcrlf for x.x.x.x[x.x.x.x]:25
> Apr 22 17:05:32 mailhost postfix/smtp[23
- Message from wie...@porcupine.org -
Date: Mon, 27 Apr 2015 07:12:46 -0400 (EDT)
From: wie...@porcupine.org
Reply-To: Postfix users
Subject: Re: maximal_queue_lifetime and bounce_queue_lifetime
To: Postfix users
an...@isac.gov.in:
Dear List,
For the parameters max
Hi,
It/I might sound dumb, but please bear with me...
For some reason my external email gateway fails to deliver some emails to
my internal machine.
The gateway runs postfix+amavis+spamassasin+clamav. Internal machine has
postfix+clamav with very small load. All emails in question are from the
sa
an...@isac.gov.in:
> Dear List,
>
> For the parameters maximal_queue_lifetime? and bounce_queue_lifetime
> default values are 5d (5 days).? Due to overquota, the mail remains in the
> queue for 5 days.? Is there a way by which a sender can be notified that
> mail has not yet been delivered to th
17 matches
Mail list logo
