[pfx] Dedicated servers for Address Verification Probes

Hi all, is it possible to have several Postfix instances to use a centralized Postfix server for address verification probes when this centralized server is NOT an MDA but a relay to external MDAs? Thanks in advance! Pete. ___ Postfix-users mailing

[pfx] Re: Postfix stopped logging lines with sender IP addresses after upgrade

On Tuesday, January 2, 2024 at 08:46:01 PM GMT+1, Vince Heuser via Postfix-users wrote: >I recently upgraded to mail_version = 3.4.23 >Suddenly, Postfix no longer logs the lines with IP addresses for the >connections. >There use to be some additional log lines with sender ip addresses.

[pfx] Re: SMTP Smuggling and filters

Thanks Wietse, yes it is clear in your doc, but both messages go through filter?? despite what the MAIL FROM is? Thanks, Pedro. On Tuesday, December 26, 2023 at 03:34:34 PM GMT+1, Wietse Venema via Postfix-users wrote: Pedro David Marco via Postfix-users: > To my understand

[pfx] SMTP Smuggling and filters

Hi all, after reading the documention from Viktor and Wietse about this issue, there is still something i do not have clear enough... Please excuse me! How does Postfix behave with the smuggled email? i mean... what happens with Milters and after-queue filters?  To my understanding, the

[pfx] Re: Chaining XFORWARD

Thanks Wietse, sometimes we want to stretch Postifx like gum beyond limits... Thanks again, Mr! Pete. On Thursday, October 12, 2023 at 02:32:11 PM GMT+2, Wietse Venema via Postfix-users wrote: Pedro David Marco via Postfix-users: > Hi, > Postfix documentation states c

[pfx] Re: *.mail.protection.outlook.com reporting "452 4.5.3 Too many recipients (AS780090)" for many domains

Microsoft incident EX680695 (sorry if i recall wrongly). Solved now! Pete. On Wednesday, October 11, 2023 at 03:24:03 PM GMT+2, Matus UHLAR - fantomas via Postfix-users wrote: On 11.10.23 15:06, Ralf Hildebrandt via Postfix-users wrote: >Since this morning, various MX hosts in

[pfx] Chaining XFORWARD

Hi, Postfix documentation states clearly that XFORDWARD is intended for scenarios like this: Client -> MTA1->  Content_filter -> MTA2 And then Content_filter is able to get  the IP of Client. Works great! But i was wondering... what i chain more MTAs? Client -> MTA1 - > MTA2 -> Content_filter ->

[pfx] Content_filter selection based on sender domain

Hi all, does anyone know how to use different content_filter based on sender domain? Thanks in advance! Pete. ___ Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@postfix.org To unsubscribe send an email to postfix-users-le...@postfix.org

[pfx] Re: Getting Recipient when Message size limit is exceeded

Thanks all!!! digging it Pete. On Friday, July 7, 2023 at 09:45:03 PM GMT+2, Wietse Venema via Postfix-users wrote: If no-one else posts one, I can post a solution that: - relies on smtpd_delay_reject=yes to postpone check_policy lookup until RCPT TO. - disables the SIZE

[pfx] Getting Recipient when Message size limit is exceeded

Hi all... Currently Postfix do not show in log the Recipient of emails that exceed Meesage_size_limit becasue MAIL FROM comes before RCPTO TO... butis there any nice way of forcing Postfix to reject that email after the RCPTO TO? I have considered to make a body check like this: /.{10-}/

Checking configuration files in advance

Hi all, Is there anyway to check for potential errors in Postifx confiuration files before movig them to /etc/postfix Thanks in advance! Pete.

Re: Centralized Verify db, possible?

Venema wrote: Pedro David Marco: > Hi, > Please, is there any way? to have a centralized Verify database?? my > intention is to reduce the number of probes in Postfix farms... > Thanks, You could try https://www.postfix.org/memcache_table.5.html - Give it enough memory. - Be s

Centralized Verify db, possible?

Hi, Please, is there any way  to have a centralized Verify database?? my intention is to reduce the number of probes in Postfix farms... Thanks, Pete.

Re: About smtp_fallback_relay parameter

Understood! Thanks a lot Wietse and Viktor! Tete. On Thursday, April 7, 2022, 08:03:36 PM GMT+2, Wietse Venema wrote: Pedro David Marco: > Sorry, but i am confused... documentation is accurate, but probably > not my understading of it... Instead of arguing about what happens

Re: About smtp_fallback_relay parameter

relaytakes place...   my understanding was that unreacahble meant "cannot connect to remote smtp port"... Thanks again! Pete. On Thursday, April 7, 2022, 07:52:43 PM GMT+2, Viktor Dukhovni wrote: On Thu, Apr 07, 2022 at 04:55:26PM +0000, Pedro David Marco wrote: &

Re: About smtp_fallback_relay parameter

On Thursday, April 7, 2022, 07:23:14 PM GMT+2, Wietse Venema wrote:>>Pedro David Marco:>>>  Hi,>> Postfix documentation about smtp_fallback_relay says:>>>> smtp_fallback_relay (default: $fallback_relay):>>  Optional list of relay hosts for SM

About smtp_fallback_relay parameter

Hi, Postfix documentation about smtp_fallback_relay says: smtp_fallback_relay (default: $fallback_relay):     Optional list of relay hosts for SMTP destinations that can't be found or that are unreachable. With Postfix 2.2 and earlier this parameter is called fallback_relay. I have

Re: Why the name Postfix?

On Monday, March 28, 2022, 12:01:58 AM GMT+2, Wietse Venema wrote: | the inspiration for my efforts. Thanks for your efforts, Wietse...  and for all your support in the list!!!  Regards.. Pete.  

Re: Add value from header to postfix/smtp daemon log

Thanks a lot... You understood me correctly! thanks for your kindness... with the INFO action, a new log line is added by cleanup daemon.. What i was trying is to make smtp daemon add that header value to its usual log lines.. Thanks, Pete. >On Tuesday, December 21, 2021, 04:20:31 PM GMT+1,

Add value from header to postfix/smtp daemon log

Hi, is it possible to configure Postfix stmp daemon to add in its log the value of a specific header? Thanks! Pete.

Re: DNS resolution problem when enabling postscreen

>On Thursday, June 17, 2021, 05:16:29 PM GMT+2, João Silva wrote: >the logs showed that the smtp process was not resolving domains Joao, just to discard an UDP overflood... paste to the list the result of command # netstat -suna Pedro.

Re: reload, main.cf, and tables updates...

On Monday, February 22, 2021, 10:55:04 PM GMT+1, Viktor Dukhovni wrote: >- For *SQL and LDAP, change is immediate. >- For indexed tables, when switching to a new client connection. >- For flat files (CIDR, PCRE, ..., main.cf), worst case $max_idle >  times $max_use, but typically of

Re: Postfix smtpd processes not aware of config changes...

Thanks Viktor and Wietse...  i will keep digging it out!! My understading was what you said, so probably the problem is anywhere else... thanks again! Pedreter. On Monday, February 22, 2021, 05:23:04 PM GMT+1, Viktor Dukhovni wrote: > On Feb 22, 2021, at 2:07 PM, Pedro David Ma

Re: Postfix smtpd processes not aware of config changes...

Ops, forgot to mention that, thanks Wietse... postfix restart means  'postfix stop ; postfix start' maybe it would be a good idea to introduce some delay between stop and start? Thanks, Pedreter. On Monday, February 22, 2021, 04:54:38 PM GMT+1, Wietse Venema wrote: Pedro David Marco

Postfix smtpd processes not aware of config changes...

Hi! i have this in my main.cf: address_verify_transport_maps = hash:/etc/postfix/transport_para_vrfy It works ok when i add a new domain, but when i modify an exsiting one and do the corresponding postmap and postfix restart, randomlysome Postfix smtpd processes (not all of them!!!) keeps trying

Re: postqueue -f delayed

Thanks, Ron, Wietse, and Viktor... i will put an eye on this, having in mind all your remarks... Pete On Monday, October 26, 2020, 10:46:51 PM GMT+1, Wietse Venema wrote: Bill Cole: > On 26 Oct 2020, at 6:07, Pedro David Marco wrote: > > > Hi... > >

Re: postqueue -f delayed

>On Monday, October 26, 2020, 05:31:05 PM GMT+1, Ron Wheeler wrote: > >Could be just that the other end was busy receiving someone else's mail. Takes 2 to tango! >No big attachments? Thanks Ron...  size no bigger than 500KB... if remote is busy...  in the log at least i should

Re: postqueue -f delayed

>On Monday, October 26, 2020, 05:09:41 PM GMT+1, Ron Wheeler wrote: >You might want to take a look at what is in the queue. >Flushing the queue means communicating with other mail servers and the reason >that mail is in the queue is that it was "too hard" to deliver it the first

postqueue -f delayed

Hi... flushing the queue with 'postqueue -f'' normally produces instant flush but sometimes it takes some time to do it... it always works! but sometimes with a long delay... just out of curiosity... why does this happen? is it qmgr daemon waiting for anything? is there any way for force it?

Illegal address syntax

Hi! Is it possible to make Postfix Reject instead of warn for  "Illegal address syntax"? Thanks! P.

Re: Mailq timestamps in localtime rather than UTC

level{'calm'}++; Thanks Wietse! Pedro. On Thursday, October 24, 2019, 6:08:11 PM GMT+2, Wietse Venema wrote: Pedro David Marco: >  I use Devuan Ascii. It uses GLIBC 2.24 > My main concern is that this problem may affect how postfix deals > with deferred emails... > What

Re: Mailq timestamps in localtime rather than UTC

as good as it gets... thanks Viktor! Pedro. On Thursday, October 24, 2019, 5:53:53 PM GMT+2, Viktor Dukhovni wrote: > On Oct 24, 2019, at 5:10 PM, Pedro David Marco > wrote: > > My main concern is that this problem may affect how postfix deals with > deferred ema

Re: Mailq timestamps in localtime rather than UTC

I use Devuan Ascii. It uses GLIBC 2.24 My main concern is that this problem may affect how postfix deals with deferred emails...  What do you think, Wietse? Thanks, Pedro. On Thursday, October 24, 2019, 4:53:45 PM GMT+2, Wietse Venema wrote: Pedro David Marco: >  Thanks Ma

Re: Mailq timestamps in localtime rather than UTC

shows UTC time despite system localtime, while other postfix elements, like headers added to the email, use localtime (CEST in my case)... Thanks... Pedro. On Thursday, October 24, 2019, 2:21:34 PM GMT+2, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote: On 24.10.19 09:05, Pedro David Marco wrote: >Normal

Re: Mailq timestamps in localtime rather than UTC

that most lilkely Postfix cannot read some file somewhere... but i have checked files permisisons and i have not any clue.. there are no errors in Posfrix log. Thanks again, Pedro. On Wednesday, October 23, 2019, 10:43:49 PM GMT+2, Wietse Venema wrote: Pedro David Marco: >  Tha

Re: Mailq timestamps in localtime rather than UTC

Thanks Wietse.. The  output is this:   # date ; env - dateWed Oct 23 21:22:20 CEST 2019Wed Oct 23 21:22:20 CEST 2019# It is actual valid localtime...  Thanks again, Pedro. On Wednesday, October 23, 2019, 3:56:51 PM GMT+2, Wietse Venema wrote: Pedro David Marco: > Hi, > my P

anyone from DocuSign ?

Hi,   sorry for the semi-off-topic, but as Docusign is using Postfix and they may have issues...  is there anyone from DocuSign in the list?  If so, please contact me off-list. Thanks, PedroD

Re: possiblities to release a mail

>On Thursday, May 31, 2018, 9:57:17 AM GMT+2, Maurizio Caloro wrote: >Hello Together   >>I ask me if are possible to view on console with postfix command witch mail’s are holding back, Status mailtraffic, and so on not mail.log about different reasons - blacklisted, spam, or score - and

Re: Set a relayhost for non local in master.cf

>On Wednesday, May 30, 2018, 6:07:01 PM GMT+2, Viktor Dukhovni > wrote: >More specifically, it is implemented in trivial-rewrite(8) >and is used indirectly by qmgr(8) to schedule deliveries >for the appropriate nexthop.  The smtp(8) delivery agent >does not perform nexthop selection, it sends

Re: Set a relayhost for non local in master.cf

>Wietse Venema: > Pedro David Marco: > > Hi, > > with Postfix 2.11 i am tryting to use a relayhost for non-local mail.. > > if i put: > > relayhost = [192.168.1.10] > > in main.cf, then it works ok. > > > > But if i p

Set a relayhost for non local in master.cf

Hi, with Postfix 2.11 i am tryting to use a relayhost for non-local mail.. if i put: relayhost = [192.168.1.10] in main.cf, then it works ok.  But if i put it in master.cf like this: smtp      unix  -       -       -       -       -       smtp         -o relayhost=[192.168.1.10] then it does not

Re: Setting up multiple transport mappings for fallback relay mailserver

>http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#smtp_fallback_relay >  >   Wietse Wietse, is there any chance to suggest a future feature to have this done via the transport file? PedroD

Re: Recipient verification with sending IP equal to probe IP

>Given your smtpd_mumble_restrictions rule, permit_mynetworks allows >a client to skip the reject_unverified_whatever check. > Wietse why Wietse? permit_mynetworks is on first place and should basically only allow loopback according tomynetworks = 127.0.0.0/8 [:::127.0.0.0]/104 [::1]/128  

Re: Recipient verification with sending IP equal to probe IP

IP Pedro David Marco: > Hi! > I am doing recipient address verification with reject_unverified _recipient  > and it works pretty well, but i havenoticed that when the sending IP  is the > same as the vrfy probing IP address, then this restriction is not applied. > do

Recipient verification with sending IP equal to probe IP

Hi! I am doing recipient address verification with reject_unverified _recipient   and it works pretty well, but i havenoticed that when the sending IP  is the same as the vrfy probing IP address, then this restriction is not applied. does it make sense?  i have this in in my main.cf: mynetworks =

Re: feedback about reject_non_fqdn_sender restriction...

Great...  Thanks+=10 Noel!! -Pedro From: Noel Jones <njo...@megan.vbhcs.org> To: postfix-users@postfix.org Sent: Tuesday, November 22, 2016 4:15 PM Subject: Re: feedback about reject_non_fqdn_sender restriction... On 11/22/2016 4:22 AM, Pedro David Marco wrote: > H

Re: space character in email address

, 2016 12:40 PM Subject: Re: space character in email address Pedro David Marco: > Hi, > i am seeing lines in postfix logs like this: > postfix/qmgr[1084]: 955AE4009A: from= burk...@server1.domainomitted.com>, size=10346, nrcpt=1 (queue active) > > please note the "

Re: space character in email address

Fool me...  crystal clear! Thanks Boris, Danke! From: Boris Behrens <b...@kervyn.de> To: Pedro David Marco <pedrod_ma...@yahoo.com> Cc: Postfix Users <postfix-users@postfix.org> Sent: Tuesday, November 22, 2016 10:58 AM Subject: Re: space character in email address

feedback about reject_non_fqdn_sender restriction...

Hi, i was wondering to what extent is it a good idea to use to use the sender restriction "reject_non_fqdn_sender" to block some spam... is anyone using it? any feedback, please? what would happen with mails from <> ?? Thanks in advance, ---Pedro

space character in email address

Hi, i am seeing lines in postfix logs like this: postfix/qmgr[1084]: 955AE4009A: from=, size=10346, nrcpt=1 (queue active) please note the "space" in the user part of the from between cesar and burklez my understading was that no space was allowed in an email addresss...  am i right? Regards,

Re: REJECT and "optional text" question...

Sorry, my fault... From: Bill Cole <postfixlists-070...@billmail.scconsult.com> To: Postfix users <postfix-users@postfix.org> Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2016 3:28 PM Subject: Re: REJECT and "optional text" question... On 26 Jul 2016, at 9:24, Pedro David Marco

Re: REJECT and "optional text" question...

stfix.org> Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2016 3:00 PM Subject: Re: REJECT and "optional text" question... On 26 Jul 2016, at 7:52, Pedro David Marco wrote: > Thanks Wietse... > > yes, i have a check_sender_access - after-  the check_client_access, > buti must be doing somethi

Re: REJECT and "optional text" question...

Thanks Bill... this is my restrictions config: From: Bill Cole <postfixlists-070...@billmail.scconsult.com> To: Postfix users <postfix-users@postfix.org> Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2016 3:00 PM Subject: Re: REJECT and "optional text" question... On 26 Jul 2016

Re: REJECT and "optional text" question...

that IP with that text??? Thanks! Pedreter. From: Wietse Venema <wie...@porcupine.org> To: Postfix users <postfix-users@postfix.org> Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2016 12:03 PM Subject: Re: REJECT and "optional text" question... Pedro David Marco: >               

REJECT and "optional text" question...

Hello, I have a sender restriction like this: smtpd_sender_restrictions = permit_mynetworks check_client_access hash:/etc/postfix/special_clients and in special_clients file: 205.201.128.108REJECT You are blacklisted What i see is that it works and the

Re: force postifx to look up again for mail exchangers

; <postfix-users@postfix.org> Date: Tuesday, June 21, 2016, 9:10 PM Pedro David Marco: > is there anyway to force Postfix to look up again the list of mail > exchangers addresses for the destination host/domain and try to > send them again??? The Postfix SMTP client **alw

Re: Cascade smtp delivery failure when one smtp fails

-us...@dukhovni.org> wrote: Subject: Re: Cascade smtp delivery failure when one smtp fails To: "Postfix users" <postfix-users@postfix.org> Date: Tuesday, March 29, 2016, 10:04 AM > On Mar 29, 2016, at 3:20 AM, Pedro David Marco <pedrod_ma...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > it

Re: Cascade smtp delivery failure when one smtp fails

, March 28, 2016, 5:21 PM Pedro David Marco: > NOW, if one smtp process delivery takes long, long long... until > it dies for the watchdog timeout, That's 18000s, or 5 hours (setting: daemon_timeout in main.cf). If you still have not fixed the watchdog problem, you should

Re: Cascade smtp delivery failure when one smtp fails

. On Mon, 3/28/16, Viktor Dukhovni <postfix-us...@dukhovni.org> wrote: Subject: Re: Cascade smtp delivery failure when one smtp fails To: "Postfix users" <postfix-users@postfix.org> Date: Monday, March 28, 2016, 4:33 PM > On Mar 28, 2016, at 10:15 AM, Pedro David Marc

Cascade smtp delivery failure when one smtp fails

Hello everybody! it seems to me that when qmgr wants to deliver an email via smtp, qmgr "assigns" it to a smtp process. As long as there are no concurrency needs, the same smtp process is used repeatedly even for diferent domain destinations. Ok so far! NOW, if one smtp process delivery

Re: Mails in active queue are never tried to be sent

. On Tue, 3/15/16, Wietse Venema <wie...@porcupine.org> wrote: Subject: Re: Mails in active queue are never tried to be sent To: "Postfix users" <postfix-users@postfix.org> Date: Tuesday, March 15, 2016, 8:48 PM Pedro David Marco:

Re: Mails in active queue are never tried to be sent

By the way, Wietse... nothing is running chrooted in master.cf David. On Tue, 3/15/16, Pedro David Marco <pedrod_ma...@yahoo.com> wrote: Subject: Re: Mails in active queue are never tried to be sent To: "Postfix users" <postfi

Re: Mails in active queue are never tried to be sent

Thanks a lot Wietse... here they are: Mar 13 06:37:24 serverA postfix/qmgr[19283]: 80844160065: from=, size=64276, nrcpt=1 (queue active) Mar 13 06:47:22 serverA postfix/error[17720]: 80844160065: to=, relay=none, delay=235656,

Mails in active queue are never tried to be sent

Hello everybody!! i am trying to run a filter relay with Postfix and i have a doubt about active queues i need help with, please... Postfix documentation states clearly that: "Messages in the active queue are ready to be sent (runnable), but are not necessarily in the process of being sent

Re: main.cf and postfix reload

3/2016 12:06 PM, Pedro David Marco wrote: > Thanks a lot Noel!! > > what you say makes sense but then i should have seen some "reload" or  "restart" messages in the log, right?? but there was not any indication! :-( > > Thanks! The replacing of old pr

Re: main.cf and postfix reload

@megan.vbhcs.org> wrote: Subject: Re: main.cf and postfix reload To: postfix-users@postfix.org Date: Thursday, March 3, 2016, 6:29 PM On 3/3/2016 11:07 AM, Pedro David Marco wrote: > Hello everybody... > > i have added a line like this: > > > recipient

main.cf and postfix reload

Hello everybody... i have added a line like this: recipient_bcc_maps = hash:/etc/postfix/recipient_bcc to my main,.cf file and postfix has suddenly started trying to use it!! i did NOT execute a "postfix" reload" !!! is this normal?? Thanks! David.

Re: smtp_fallback_relay in transport maps...

" <postfix-users@postfix.org> Date: Tuesday, January 12, 2016, 3:07 PM Pedro David Marco: > Thanks a lot Wietse for your quick answer... > > but then... does this mean that i cannot use smtp_fallback_relays > in transport_map file?? Perhaps you can explain wha

Re: smtp_fallback_relay in transport maps...

ct: Re: smtp_fallback_relay in transport maps... To: "Postfix users" <postfix-users@postfix.org> Date: Tuesday, January 12, 2016, 12:25 PM Pedro David Marco: > Hello everybody!!! > > I am trying to set smtp_fallback_relays per domain in the transport map file. >

smtp_fallback_relay in transport maps...

Hello everybody!!! I am trying to set smtp_fallback_relays per domain in the transport map file. According to the documentation this is possible: "In transport maps, specify "relay:nexthop..." as the right-hand side for backup or primary MX domain entries." i have tried: domain.com