On 16/04/2023 21:11, Viktor Dukhovni via Postfix-users wrote:
> Not surprising,
I suspect that the OP did not recognise the $ and # characters in your
instructions as shell prompts (to be omitted from the commands being
executed), and copy/pasted them into his shell as-is.
HTH, Jan
On 16/04/2023 05:57, tom--- via Postfix-users wrote:
> Intentionally at the request of web.de it seems. Did you read:
>>
>> https://www.spamhaus.org/sbl/query/SBL175032
>>
>> If your message was blocked, and was not spam, contact:
>>
>> https://postmaster.web.de/en/case?c=uar
>
> I sent
On 16/06/2022 22:39, Bill Cole wrote:
>
>> I realize links would have to be pulled to generate the image but
>> ultimately I would like the end user to just get an image
>> representation of what the html email would look like with no links
>> or link following by the MUA.
>
> Therein lies the
On 19/04/2021 02:15, Steve Dondley wrote:
> I'm looking at config documentation for solr on dovecot:
> https://doc.dovecot.org/configuration_manual/fts/solr/
>
> In the suggested solrconfig.xml file
> (https://raw.githubusercontent.com/dovecot/core/master/doc/solr-config-7.7.0.xml),
> it has the
On 08/03/2021 17:35, Wietse Venema wrote:
> For those who are getting code/docs from {www,ftp}.porcupine.org,
> this weekend the servers were moved from subnet 168.100.185.112/28
> to 168.100.64/28.
>
> Wietse
Presumably that's 168.100.3.64/28
On 30/01/2021 18:53, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
>> Dnia 29.01.2021 o godz. 19:29:14 Matus UHLAR - fantomas pisze:
>>> yes, but OTOH I'm not sure if fetchmail or getmail support single
>>> mail for
>>> multiple recipients.
>
> On 29.01.21 22:24, Jaroslaw Rafa wrote:
>>> From fetchmail website:
On 29/12/2020 13:58, Wolfgang Paul Rauchholz wrote:
> I am setting up an email server on my home box with postfix and dovecot
> My server is modem router and has as such an internal and external
> network interface
>
> *>From my laptop (LAN)
> *From Thunderbird I get the message: Could not connect
On 06/07/2020 15:23, Wietse Venema wrote:
> MTA service is on port 25. Other ports don't count as MTA service,
> therefore loop detection does not apply.
Still worth documenting?
On 19/06/2020 10:18, Nick Tait wrote:
> Hi David.
>
> I think I can guess what your problem is, because I had exactly the
> same symptom with a different bulk email provider...
>
> Basically this sounds like an MTU issue: The SMTP client
> (mailomta12-sa.btinternet.com[213.120.69.18] in your case)
On 17/04/2020 15:08, Ranjan Maitra wrote:
> Btw, for me, when ifconfig is DOWN, I do not get a down.
ifconfig -a fixes that.
On 18/09/2019 10:15, Helmut Schneider wrote:
> I'm open for improvements. It's for my home usage, a relay in the
> internet with a static ip forwarding mails to my server at home with an
> ip changing every 24h connected via OpenVPN. What's you suggestions?
>
>
Fetchmail?
On 10/08/2019 23:22, Wietse Venema wrote:
> NOTE 1: The access map lookup key must be in canonical form: DO
> NOT SPECIFY UNNECESSARY NULL CHARACTERS, and do not enclose net-
> work address information with "[]" characters.
>
> Emphasis added for clarity.
On 30/05/2019 14:41, Jos Chrispijn wrote:
> On 30-5-19 14:25, Wietse Venema wrote:
>> Again, this confirms my suspicion that the system has gotten messed
>> up. Postfix has been around for decennia and it does not require
>> restarts to stay functional.
>
> Ok, thanks y'all for helping out.
On 14/01/17 20:58, Richie Rich wrote:
> Thanks for the quick response. Can you point me in a direction to
> accomplish what I'm trying to do?
> I'm totally new to postfix.
I am by no means an expert, but I do hope that the following helps:
http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#smtp_generic_maps
On 11/01/17 15:44, Wietse Venema wrote:
> Thanks for spotting that. What about adding some text:
> Note: The smtp(8) and lmtp(8) delivery agents can make delivery
> attempts to multiple MX or A destinations. Unlike
> (smtp|lmtp)_reply_filter, the (smtp|lmtp)_delivery_status_filter
>
On 09/01/17 21:06, @lbutlr wrote:
> 640K RAM ought to be enough for everybody.
>> No even similar. The address space for 128bit is in the general neighborhood
>> of the number of atoms in the universe.
> Sorry, that's 256 bits. 128 bits is the number of stars in
> 100,000,000,000,000,000
On 09/01/17 16:58, @lbutlr wrote:
> (1.8x10E19 is enough address space for every single person on the planet to
> have two and a half billion IPs to themselves).
640K RAM ought to be enough for everybody.
On 06/01/17 20:28, Wietse Venema wrote:
> Instead of logging a warning when it receives an unexpected protocol
> message?
> Postfix could require that the 'first' message between Postfix
> programs(*) contains the protocol name (enqueue, bounce, deliver,
> verify, ...). That way, the warning
On 24/10/16 18:29, Allen Coates wrote:
>
> Over the weekend I had three spam messages get through to my in-box. Two
> contained an "X-PHP-Script" header
>
> one was
> X-PHP-Script:
> folar.org/wp-content/plugins/the-events-calendar/src/Tribe/Aggregator/uploader.php
> for 110.83.63.152
>
> and
On 03/08/16 16:51, Paul wrote:
> line 4: missing '=' after attribute name: "SELECT
> aliases.id,sasl_aliases.id FROM sasl_aliases,aliases WHERE
> aliases.address=sasl_aliases.address AND aliases.address='%s'"
You might have gone over this so many times that you're missing it:
You need to prepend
On 16/07/16 17:42, Yuval Levy wrote:
> Imposing the onus on the SMTP server operator is like imposing the onus
> on gas stations for fueling vehicles used in criminal endeavors. It
> does not fly because the gas station can't possibly know what the user
> will use the vehicle for, other than
On 16/07/16 15:59, Michael Fox wrote:
> So, are there other obvious ways to recognize encrypted contents, other than
> "Content-Type: multipart/encrypted"?
Theoretical (and therefore possibly entirely impractical) answer:
Encrypted data contains a high amount of entropy, meaning that it does
not
On 29/06/16 17:02, Chip wrote:
> If Return-path is added by receiving MTA, as you say, below, and that it
> contains the MAIL FROM, then why do I see the following in source code
> of received message in which return-path does not match From?
Could I respectfully suggest that you read up on the
On 12/06/16 02:05, Wietse Venema wrote:
> Wietse Venema:
>> I have changed the text to:
>>
>> Otherwise it replies with the query arguments plus an empty
>> address list and the reply TTL. The reply TTL is -1 if no
>> reply is received, or if the reply contains no TTL
On 07/04/16 20:19, Juerg Reimann wrote:
> Sorry if this has been asked a 1000 times (but I couldn't find a hint). I
> need to relay the majority of users of one domain to another postfix host,
> except two users. How would I accomplish this?
>
> Like: us...@example.com and us...@example.com
On 14/12/15 15:12, Wietse Venema wrote:
> The idea is that you can have virtual alias mappings, even when
> the address is NOT in a virtual alias domain.
>
> virtual_alias_maps is just a global mapping; it just so happens that
> this same mechanism is also used to implement virtual_alias_domains.
On 14/12/15 12:43, Wietse Venema wrote:
> Jan Ceuleers:
>> Hi
>>
>> I'm a new Postfix user, having just switched from sendmail (which I set
>> up years ago and then forgot how).
>>
>> I want my Postfix server to locally deliver emails for my own accounts
&
Hi
I'm a new Postfix user, having just switched from sendmail (which I set
up years ago and then forgot how).
I want my Postfix server to locally deliver emails for my own accounts
and those of my housemates, but relay all others. So for example:
Locally deliver these:
28 matches
Mail list logo
