sys4.de are not removing original DKIM sigs just adding postfix.org's,
which also fails for some reason, but ohh looky that - SPF passes :D
Decided to have a look ater lunch, that looks like it would be because
sys4 adds footers, where previously Wietse did not, again if they
configured
On 05/11/2023 20:02, Benny Pedersen via Postfix-users wrote:
DKIM, was a problem, but for several years now mailman can do the
right thing by stripping out the original DKIM headers and rewrites
sender (although you need to know where to add the former) - but only
if the admins set those
On 06/11/2023 02:48, Fred Morris via Postfix-users wrote:
Let's step out of the echo chamber or petri dish or whatever.
On Sun, 5 Nov 2023, Jaroslaw Rafa via Postfix-users wrote: Dnia
5.11.2023 o godz. 13:53:46 Noel Butler via Postfix-users pisze: If
correctly forwarded it does not break
r.barclay--- via Postfix-users:
> Hello,
>
> Does Postfix support specifying multiple lookup tables for
> check_recipient_access?
> (If there's no match in the first table, look up in the next one.)
>
> smtpd_recipient_restrictions =
> reject_unauth_pipelining,
>
Hello,
Does Postfix support specifying multiple lookup tables for
check_recipient_access?
(If there's no match in the first table, look up in the next one.)
smtpd_recipient_restrictions =
reject_unauth_pipelining,
reject_invalid_helo_hostname,
On Sun, Nov 05, 2023 at 12:13:17PM +, Matthias Nagel via Postfix-users
wrote:
> Viktor, you recommend to use proxymap in combination with LDAP,
Yes.
> especially if all LDAP lookups use the same connection.
Regardless of whether the connection settings are the same across all
tables. But
On 2023-11-05 17:51, Wietse Venema via Postfix-users wrote:
Jesper Dybdal via Postfix-users:
To avoid using a public name server for DNSBL lookups, I would like the
DNSBL checks to be done using only the name server running on localhost.
But I would like the rest of the system to have for
Jesper Dybdal via Postfix-users:
> To avoid using a public name server for DNSBL lookups, I would like the
> DNSBL checks to be done using only the name server running on localhost.
> But I would like the rest of the system to have for instance Google as a
> secondary name server.
>
> I do not
Let's step out of the echo chamber or petri dish or whatever.
On Sun, 5 Nov 2023, Jaroslaw Rafa via Postfix-users wrote:
Dnia 5.11.2023 o godz. 13:53:46 Noel Butler via Postfix-users pisze:
If correctly forwarded it does not break SPF, since correctly
forwarding rewrites the sender
It's a
As Viktor mentions, best practice is to:
- Share the LDAP socket handle among the three tables that connect
to the same LDAP endpoint (i.e. delay the bind with bind=no in the
three *cf files).
- Open LDAP tables from outside the chroot, by configuring LDAP
tables as proxy:ldap:/path/to/file, and
On 2023-11-05 15:41, Matus UHLAR - fantomas via Postfix-users wrote:
Jesper Dybdal via Postfix-users skrev den 2023-11-05 13:48:
To avoid using a public name server for DNSBL lookups, I would like
the DNSBL checks to be done using only the name server running on
localhost.
But I would like the
Dnia 5.11.2023 o godz. 13:53:46 Noel Butler via Postfix-users pisze:
> If correctly forwarded it does not break SPF, since correctly
> forwarding rewrites the sender, I was an early adopter of SPF and
> always used hard-fail, no lists have rejected my posts from SPF
> (trust me, if they did, I
Matus UHLAR - fantomas via Postfix-users skrev den 2023-11-05 15:41:
Jesper Dybdal via Postfix-users skrev den 2023-11-05 13:48:
To avoid using a public name server for DNSBL lookups, I would like
the DNSBL checks to be done using only the name server running on
localhost.
But I would like the
Jesper Dybdal via Postfix-users skrev den 2023-11-05 13:48:
To avoid using a public name server for DNSBL lookups, I would like
the DNSBL checks to be done using only the name server running on
localhost.
But I would like the rest of the system to have for instance Google
as a secondary name
Jesper Dybdal via Postfix-users skrev den 2023-11-05 13:48:
To avoid using a public name server for DNSBL lookups, I would like the
DNSBL checks to be done using only the name server running on
localhost.
But I would like the rest of the system to have for instance Google as
a secondary name
To avoid using a public name server for DNSBL lookups, I would like the
DNSBL checks to be done using only the name server running on localhost.
But I would like the rest of the system to have for instance Google as a
secondary name server.
I do not use postscreen.
If I place a resolv.conf
Dear Viktor, dear Wietse,
Viktor, you recommend to use proxymap in combination with LDAP, especially if
all LDAP lookups use the same connection. Indeed, this is the case for my
setup. The LDAP server, the bind DN and bind passwd are the same. Only the
search base, the query filter and the
Noel Butler via Postfix-users skrev den 2023-11-05 04:53:
On 03/11/2023 10:22, Steffen Nurpmeso via Postfix-users wrote:
- SPF breaks all hosts which have users that effectively want
their email to be forwarded to a different address.
This is basically any campus, and much, much more.
FUD...
18 matches
Mail list logo
