Re: How does Postfix validate IP of sender on incoming messages?

> On Apr 21, 2017, at 6:43 PM, Michael Segel wrote: > > I’m trying to debug my new mail server… > > I’m testing with incoming messages from an external account and while my old > mail server can correctly identify the IP address of the host, my new server >

How does Postfix validate IP of sender on incoming messages?

I’m trying to debug my new mail server… I’m testing with incoming messages from an external account and while my old mail server can correctly identify the IP address of the host, my new server doesn’t. I checked the inbound IP address with both dig -x and nslookup. In both cases both

Re: OPENSSL_VERSION_NUMBER not an unsigned Int

> On Apr 21, 2017, at 5:16 PM, Bernard Spil wrote: > > Working with patches for Postfix I noticed you use a non-standard way to test > for OpenSSL version numbers. You're using comparisons to an unsigned int > constant whereas OPENSSL_VERSION_NUMBER has only ever been

OPENSSL_VERSION_NUMBER not an unsigned Int

Hi, Working with patches for Postfix I noticed you use a non-standard way to test for OpenSSL version numbers. You're using comparisons to an unsigned int constant whereas OPENSSL_VERSION_NUMBER has only ever been defined as an int see

Re: connection caching - limitations

Am 21.04.2017 um 16:08 schrieb Viktor Dukhovni: > Message injection via sendmail(1) is much less efficient than injection > via SMTP. The message is synced to disk twice, and the pickup(8) service > can only process one message at a time, while SMTP inject can handle > multiple messages in

Re: Does white-listing 'postmaster' white-list all the other recipients?

Yes, that accords with my understanding. (And I'll take another look at that README.) Thank you. On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 9:39 AM, Bill Cole < postfixlists-070...@billmail.scconsult.com> wrote: > On 20 Apr 2017, at 17:54, J. Johnson wrote: > > Incidentally, I do have "smtp_delay_reject = yes",

Re: Does white-listing 'postmaster' white-list all the other recipients?

On 20 Apr 2017, at 17:54, J. Johnson wrote: Incidentally, I do have "smtp_delay_reject = yes", which *delays* the processing. But I appears that none of the smtpd_*_restrictions (if specified) are skipped. Which I find handy for controlling how they are applied to different addresses.

Re: connection caching - limitations

> On Apr 21, 2017, at 4:11 AM, A. Schulze wrote: > > A script generates 10k message files, same sender, different receiver. > They are injected using "sendmail -t -f sender < messagefile" in the local MTA > The MTA is configured to forward all messages to a central MSA.

Re: connection caching - limitations

A. Schulze: > > Hallo, > > that's my (legacy) setup: > > a script generate 10k message files, same sender, different receiver. > they are injected using "sendmail -t -f sender < messagefile" in the local MTA > The MTA is configured to forward all messages to a central MSA. > > This MSA require

connection caching - limitations

Hallo, that's my (legacy) setup: a script generate 10k message files, same sender, different receiver. they are injected using "sendmail -t -f sender < messagefile" in the local MTA The MTA is configured to forward all messages to a central MSA. This MSA require authentication and STARTTLS